Scott v. Liberty County School System
Filing
10
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS that case be dismissed without prejudice re 5 Complaint filed by Marcus Scott, 1 Complaint filed by Marcus Scott Objections to R&R due by 5/18/2009. To the extent that his Rule 4(m) response may be construed as a motion for appointment of counsel under the Court's discretionary authority, it is Denied. Signed by Magistrate Judge G. R. Smith on 5/4/2009. (mah)
<![CDATA[
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA SAVANNAH DIVISION MARCUS SCOTT, Plaintiff,
V.
LIBERTY COUNTY BOARD OF EDUCATION, Defendant.
) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )
Case No. CV408-191
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION After plaintiff filed this Title VII case, the Court directed him to comply with various deadlines designed to prevent civil cases from languishing on the Court's docket. Doc. 7. One of those deadlines is Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m)'s 120-day limit for serving defendants. Id. at 2-3. In that 120 days have elapsed with no such service, the Court directed plaintiff to show cause why this case should not be dismissed without prejudice under Rule 4(m). Doc. 8. Plaintiff responds that he needs legal assistance and otherwise cannot afford to litigate this case. Doc. 9. Congress, however, has chosen
not to provide a right to free legal assistance for such litigants, and in the meantime Scott has not shown good cause to prevent Rule 4(m) dismissal here. To the extent his Rule 4(m) response may be construed as a motion for appointment of counsel under the Court's discretionary authority, it is DENIED because Scott has "demonstrated no exceptional circumstances justifying the need for counsel. See Kilgo v.
Ricks, 983 F.2d 189 1 193 (11th Cir. 1993)." Bell v. Florida Highway
Patrol,
2009 WL 1006070 at * 2 n. 4 (11th Cir. Apr. 15, 2009)
(unpublished). The Court instructed Scott on how to effect proper service of process. (Doc. 7.) He did not do so, and in the face of this Court's demand for an explanation as to why service was not timely perfected, he has not offered any circumstances warranting the preservation of his case. Accordingly, the Court should DISMISS Marcus Scott's case WITHOUT PREJUDICE. SO REPORTED AND RECOMMENDED this 4th day of May, TSIST!J
Is! G.R. SMITH UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
2
]]>
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?
