From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Wallace v. Doe

United States District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania
Jul 29, 2011
CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:10-CV-0948 (M.D. Pa. Jul. 29, 2011)

Opinion

CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:10-CV-0948.

July 29, 2011


ORDER


AND NOW, this 29th day of July, 2011, upon consideration of plaintiff's motions for appointment of counsel (Docs. 66, 68), and assuming that plaintiff's claims brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, have an arguable basis in law or fact, and it appearing from the record that he is capable of properly and forcefully prosecuting his claims with adequate factual investigation and appropriate citations to governing authority, that discovery neither implicates complex legal or factual issues nor requires factual investigation or the testimony of expert witnesses, see Tabron v. Grace, 6 F.3d 147, 155-57 (3d Cir. 1993) (listing factors relevant to request for counsel) it is hereby ORDERED that:

1. Plaintiff's motions for appointment of counsel (Docs. 66, 68) are DENIED. If further proceedings demonstrate the need for counsel, the matter will be reconsidered either sua sponte or upon motion of petitioner.
2. Plaintiff's motions to extend the discovery period (Doc. 70) and to delay his deposition (Doc. 69) pending this Court's decision on his motions for appointment of counsel are DENIED as moot.


Summaries of

Wallace v. Doe

United States District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania
Jul 29, 2011
CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:10-CV-0948 (M.D. Pa. Jul. 29, 2011)
Case details for

Wallace v. Doe

Case Details

Full title:TYREE WALLACE, Plaintiff v. JANE DOE, et al., Defendants

Court:United States District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania

Date published: Jul 29, 2011

Citations

CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:10-CV-0948 (M.D. Pa. Jul. 29, 2011)