KITCHEN v. ESSEX COUNTY CORRECTIONAL FACILITY et al, No. 2:2012cv02199 - Document 9 (D.N.J. 2012)
Court Description: LETTER OPINION. Signed by Judge Jose L. Linares on 7/16/2012. (nr, )
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
LETTER OPINION Ju1y/ 2012 Arthur Kitchen #541049/916939A Mid-State Correctional Facility P0 Box 866 Wrightstown, NJ 08562 Jeffrey S. Chiesa New Jersey Attorney General Richard J. Hughes Justice Complex 25 Market Street, P.O. Box 080 Trenton, NJ 08625 Re: Arthur Kitchen v. Essex County Correctional Facility Civil Action No. 12-2 199 (JLL) Dear Parties: Petitioner Arthur Kitchen ( Petitioner ), a state prisoner filing p Sc, commenced this action on April 12, 2012, by submitting a civil rights complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 1983. § [Docket Entry No. 1]. Petitioner s filing asserts that, on January 21, 2012, he was knocke d unconscious and assaulted without provocation by officers at the Essex County Correc tional Facility. (Compi., at 5). On June 13, 2012, Petitioner submitted an Application for Pro Bono Counsel in a Civil Rights Case, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. l915(e)(1). [Docket Entry No. 8]. § Petitioner has been granted permission to proceed j forma pauperis pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915. The Court now considers Petitioner s application for pro bono counse l. Petitioner possesses no constitutional right to representation in a civil case. Parham v. Johnson, 126 F.3d 454, 456 (3d Cir. 1997). However, a district court may reques t an attorney to represent a person who has been granted permission to proceed forma pauper is in the action j and is unable to afford counsel. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1). Because pro bono time is a precious and limited commodity, the appointment of counsel should be given consideration only if the claim has some merit in fact and law. Parham, 126 F.3d at 457. Bragg v. Agarwal, 2009 WL 4125460, No. 09-4331 (D.N.J. November 23, 2009). In determining whether this Court should grant Petitioner s motion, it must consider the following factors: (1) the plaintiff s ability to present his or her case based on such factors as education, literacy, prior work experience, prior litigation experience, the substantive nature of the claim, and/or the ability to understand English; (2) the complexity of the legal issues involved and the lawyering skills required for an effective presentation of the claim; (3) whether the claims are likely to require extensive discovery or compliance with comple x discovery rules; and (4) whether the case is likely to turn on credibility determinations or if expert testimony is necessary. See Tabron v. Grace, 6 F.3d 147 (3d Cir. 1993)). Section 1915(e )(1) gives district courts broad discretion to request an attorney to represent an indigent civil litigant. Tabron, 6 F.3d at 153. If it appears that an indigent plaintiff with a claim of arguable merit is incapable of presenting his or her own case, serious consideration should be given to appointing counsel. 14. at 156. Although Petitioner has established himself as indigent, or financially eligible, it is apparent from Petitioner s filings that he is able to clearly articulate his legal claims, as well as the facts supporting such claims. For instance, without the assistance of counsel, Petitio ner submitted a civil complaint and an affidavit of indigence, which exhibits a good unders tanding of the relevant issues and requirements under this Court s rules. Moreover, Petitioner has not demonstrated (a) the complexity of the legal issues at hand, or (b) the need for expert testimony or an evidentiary hearing at this juncture. Although Plaintiff states that he faces signif icant medical issues, he has neither stated the nature of those medical issues nor how those medical issues would affect his ability to represent himself at this stage. (See Application for Pro Bono Counsel, at 3 [Docket Entry No. 8]). Accordingly, for the foregoing reasons, Petitioner s application for appointment of pro bono counsel is denied without prejudice to Petitioner s reassertion of the same should circumstances change or Petitioner provides a clearer statement about the nature of his medical issues, the complexity of the legal issues at hand, and the need for enhanced assista nce based on a need for expert testimony or an evidentiary hearing. An appropriate Order accom panies this Letter Opinion. Sincerel nited States District Judge 2
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
