Howard v. Fidelity National Title Insurance Company, No. 4:2010cv02368 - Document 76 (E.D. Mo. 2012)
Court Description: OPINION, MEMORANDUM AND ORDER HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiffs Motion to Compel Court to Enter Scheduling Order and Motion for Appointment of Counsel [ECFNo. 48 ] is DENIED. Signed by District Judge Henry E. Autrey on 08/14/2012. (CLK)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI EASTERN DIVISION DERRICK HOWARD, Plaintiff, v. FIDELITY NATIONAL TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) No. 4:10CV2368 HEA OPINION, MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff s Motion to Compel Court to Enter Scheduling Order and Motion to Appoint Counsel [ECF No. 48]. The motion will be denied. Motion to Compel Court to Enter Scheduling Order Plaintiff s filed this Motion on January 23, 2012. On January 24, 2012, the Court issued a Case Management Order [ECF No. 51]. As such, Plaintiff s Motion to Compel Court to Enter Scheduling Order is moot. Motion to Appoint Counsel There is no constitutional or statutory right to appointed counsel in civil cases. Nelson v. Redfield Lithograph Printing, 728 F.2d 1003, 1004 (8th Cir. 1984). In determining whether to appoint counsel, the Court considers several factors, including (1) whether the plaintiff has presented non-frivolous allegations supporting his or her prayer for relief; (2) whether the plaintiff will substantially benefit from the appointment of counsel; (3) whether there is a need to further investigate and present the facts related to the plaintiff s allegations; and (4) whether the factual and legal issues presented by the action are complex. See Johnson v. Williams, 788 F.2d 1319, 1322-23 (8th Cir. 1986); Nelson, 728 F.2d at 1005. After considering these factors, the Court finds that the facts and legal issues involved are not so complicated that the appointment of counsel is warranted at this time. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff s Motion to Compel Court to Enter Scheduling Order and Motion for Appointment of Counsel [ECF No. 48] is DENIED. Dated this 14th day of August, 2012. HENRY EDWARD AUTREY UNITED 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.
