Dublino v. Thomas et al, No. 6:2018cv06010 - Document 79 (W.D.N.Y. 2019)

Court Description: DECISION & ORDER denying without prejudice 78 Motion to Appoint Counsel. It is plaintiff's responsibility to retain an attorney or press forward with this lawsuit pro se. Signed by Hon. Marian W. Payson on 10/31/2019. Copy of this Decision & Order sent by First Class Mail to plaintiff Mark T. Dublino on 10/31/2019 to his address of record. (KAH)

Download PDF
Dublino v. Thomas et al Doc. 79 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK _______________________________________ MARK T. DUBLINO, Plaintiff, v. DECISION & ORDER 18-CV-6010L JAMES THOMAS, et al., Defendants. _______________________________________ On January 4, 2018, pro se plaintiff Mark T. Dublino (“plaintiff”) commenced this action against the defendants pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 alleging claims for excessive force and failure to protect in violation of the Eighth Amendment. (Docket # 12). Currently pending before this Court is plaintiff’s fifth motion seeking appointment of counsel. (Docket # 78). Plaintiff’s previous requests for appointment of counsel have all been denied. (Docket ## 29, 31, 49, 67). Plaintiff’s current motion does not present any information to alter this Court’s previous determinations. Accordingly, for the reasons in the previous Decisions & Orders (Docket # 29, 31, 49, 67), plaintiff’s request for the appointment of counsel (Docket # 78) is DENIED without prejudice at this time. It is the plaintiff’s responsibility to retain an attorney or press forward with this lawsuit pro se. 28 U.S.C. § 1654. IT IS SO ORDERED. s/Marian W. Payson MARIAN W. PAYSON United States Magistrate Judge Dated: Rochester, New York October 31, 2019 Dockets.Justia.com

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.