Summary
asserting that employment discrimination litigation was simple case
Summary of this case from Hoggard v. Catch, Inc.Opinion
Civil Action No. 03-361
April 1, 2003
MEMORANDUM
This pro se indigent plaintiff has requested the appointment of counsel to represent him in this employment discrimination case. According to documents filed with the Complaint the plaintiff was hired by the defendant on or about April 9, 2001 and terminated on or about July 17, 2001 for being late for work. Plaintiff believes that he was discriminated against because of his sex, male and race, black.
In reviewing this request in light of the factors set forth in Tabron v. Grace, 6 F.3d 147, 1993, we note the following:
At this stage of the proceeding it is difficult to determine the merits of this claim, although plaintiff's failure to interest private counsel in this potentially fee shifting claim, could give one cause to doubt its merits.
Plaintiff who according to the Complaint is a chemist, appeared in court, seemed to be intelligent, was articulate, and this court believes able to present this rather simple case.
Plaintiff is not confined in any way and would be able to conduct any factual investigation needed.
The case does not appear to require the testimony of expert witnesses.
Based upon these considerations we enter the following Order.
ORDER
AND NOW, this 1st day of April, 2003, plaintiff's request for the appointment of counsel is DENIED.