From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Scott v. Beth

United States District Court, E.D. Wisconsin
Oct 1, 2007
Case No. 07-C-757 (E.D. Wis. Oct. 1, 2007)

Opinion

Case No. 07-C-757.

October 1, 2007


ORDER


Plaintiff has requested the appointment of counsel. He states that his indigency precludes him from hiring an attorney and that his inexperience in the law will hamper his ability to prosecute this case. Although 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1) allows courts to "request" that an attorney represent a plaintiff, there is, strictly speaking, no ability or funds to "appoint" counsel in the traditional sense. Therefore, requesting that an attorney provide services free of charge will be the exception rather than the rule, although the determination of whether counsel is necessary is governed by several factors. Here, the request will be denied. First, plaintiff has not indicated that he has attempted to contact any attorneys on his own. Second, the nature of the claim is not so complex that the assistance of counsel would prove necessary to secure justice. The plaintiff merely alleges that his pain is going untreated, and his assertion is that the defendants know he is in pain but refuse to dispense narcotics.

If further proceedings demonstrate that the plaintiff has a meritorious case, the court may reconsider the appointment of counsel at that time. But for the time-being, plaintiff has not demonstrated that he is entitled to the appointment of counsel. Accordingly, the request for appointment is DENIED.


Summaries of

Scott v. Beth

United States District Court, E.D. Wisconsin
Oct 1, 2007
Case No. 07-C-757 (E.D. Wis. Oct. 1, 2007)
Case details for

Scott v. Beth

Case Details

Full title:JAMES SCOTT, Plaintiff, v. DAVID BETH and DR. JOHNSON, Defendants

Court:United States District Court, E.D. Wisconsin

Date published: Oct 1, 2007

Citations

Case No. 07-C-757 (E.D. Wis. Oct. 1, 2007)