Ray v. Kroger Store #734 et al, No. 4:2012cv03562 - Document 5 (S.D. Tex. 2013)
Court Description: OPINION AND ORDER denying 4 Plaintiff's Motion to Appoint Counsel.(Signed by Judge Melinda Harmon) Parties notified.(htippen, )
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION CHARLES E. RAY, Plaintiff, VS. KROGER STORE #734 AND KROGER, TEXAS, L.P., Defendant. § § § § § § § § § § CIVIL ACTION H-12-3562 OPINION AND ORDER Pending before the Court in the above referenced cause, alleging employment discrimination based on race under Title VII, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq., is pro se Plaintiff Charles E. Ray. s motion for appointment of counsel (instrument #4). Under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1), The court may request an attorney to represent any person unable to afford counsel. Nevertheless, there is no automatic right to appointment of counsel in a civil case, and the court has considerable discretion in determining whether to do so. Jackson v. Dallas Police Dep t, 811 F.2d 260, 261 (5th Cir, 1986); Salmon v. Corpus Christi Indep. Sch. Dist., 911 F.2d 1165, 1166 (5th Cir. 1990). An indigent civil litigant does not have an automatic right to appointed counsel absent exceptional circumstances. Norton v. E.U. Dimazana, 122 F.3d 286, 293 (5th Cir. 1997); Akasike v. Fitzpatrick, 26 F.3d 510, 512 (5th Cir, 1994). A court may appoint counsel in a civil case -1- if doing so would advance the proper administration of justice. Ulmer v. Chancellor, 691 F.2d 209, 212-13 (5th Cir. 1982). The court may consider the following factors in deciding whether exceptional present and circumstances whether justifying appointed such counsel an would appointment are facilitate the administration of justice: (1) the complexity of the suit; (2) the ability of the indigent litigant to present the case; (3) the litigant s ability to investigate the case; and (4) the skill required to litigate the case Chancellor, 691 F.2d at 212-13. before the court. Ulmer v. As the Fifth Circuit recently stated, [E]very litigant benefits by having an attorney. However the burden is on the plaintiff to demonstrate that, unique from other pro se litigants, he will have particular difficulty in investigating and presenting his case such that his situation justifies the special benefit of having counsel appointed to represent him. Margin v. Social Security Administration, Civ. A. No. 08-4605, 2009 WL 3673025, *2 (5th Cir. Oct. 28, 2009). As a threshold matter, Plaintiff, who is still employed by Kroger, has not filed in forma pauperis nor provided evidence of indigency. Nor has he made any showing that he would have particular difficulty in investigating and presenting his case. The Court finds no exceptional circumstances in the instant case to warrant appointment of counsel. The issue in the case is not complex, and Plaintiff has adequately explained the nature of his -2- grievance in his complaint and exhibits (#1 and 2). Accordingly, the Court ORDERS that Plaintiff s motion for appointment of counsel is DENIED. SIGNED at Houston, Texas, this 15th day of January, 2013. ___________________________ MELINDA HARMON UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE -3-
]]>
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.
