Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Perotti v. Marlberry

United States District Court, E.D. Michigan, Southern Division

July 20, 2015

JOHN W. PEROTTI, Plaintiff,
v.
MS. MARLBERRY, ET AL., Defendants.

District Judge John Corbett O’Meara

ORDER

R. STEVEN WHALEN UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Plaintiff John W. Perotti, a pro se federal prison inmate in this civil rights action, has filed a motion for the appointment of counsel [Doc. #209].

Unlike criminal cases, there is no constitutional or statutory right to the appointment of counsel in civil cases. Rather, the Court requests members of the bar to assist in appropriate cases. In Lavado v. Keohane, 992 F.2d 601, 605-606 (6th Cir. 1993), the Sixth Circuit noted that “[a]ppointment of counsel in a civil case is not a constitutional right. It is a privilege that is justified only by exceptional circumstances.” (Internal quotations and citations omitted).

It is the practice of this Court to defer any attempt to obtain counsel for pro se civil rights Plaintiffs until after motions to dismiss or motions for summary judgment have been denied. This case has a lengthy procedural history, and was remanded by the Sixth Circuit. A contested motion to amend complaint is pending. Depending on the decision of that motion, dispositive motions may follow. At this point, Plaintiff’s motion to appoint counsel is premature. If Plaintiff’s claims ultimately survive dispositive motions, he may renew his motion for appointment of counsel at that time.

Accordingly, Plaintiff’s motion to appoint counsel [Doc. #209] is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.