Smout v. Cutrubus Motors et al, No. 1:2015cv00001 - Document 17 (D. Utah 2015)
Court Description: MEMORANDUM DECISION and ORDER denying 15 Motion to Appoint Counsel. Signed by Judge Ted Stewart on 8/13/2015. (blh)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Smout v. Cutrubus Motors et al Doc. 17 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF UTAH HEATHER SMOUT, MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S REQUEST TO APPOINT COUNSEL Plaintiff, v. CUTRUBUS MOTORS et al., Case No. 1:15-CV-1 TS Defendants. District Judge Ted Stewart This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff’s Motion for Appointment of Counsel. As a civil litigant, Plaintiff has no constitutional right to counsel. 1 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e) provides that “[t]he court may request an attorney to represent any person unable to afford counsel.” The appointment of counsel under this statute is within the discretion of the court. 2 When deciding whether to appoint counsel, the Court considers a variety of factors, “including ‘the merits of the litigant’s claims, the nature of the factual issues raised in the claims, the litigant’s ability to present his claims, and the complexity of the legal issues raised by those claims.’” 3 In considering these factors, the Court concludes that (1) it is not yet clear whether Plaintiff has asserted a colorable claim; (2) the issues involved, both factually and legally, do not appear to be overly complex; and (3) Plaintiff is not incapacitated or otherwise unable to adequately prosecute this matter. Therefore, the Court will deny Plaintiff’s Motion for 1 MacCuish v. United States, 844 F.2d 733, 735 (10th Cir. 1988). 2 McCarthy v. Weinberg, 753 F.2d 836, 838 (10th Cir. 1985). 3 Rucks v. Boergermann, 57 F.3d 978, 979 (10th Cir. 1995) (quoting Williams v. Meese, 926 F.2d 994, 996 (10th Cir. 1991)). 1 Dockets.Justia.com Appointment of Counsel. However, if this case is found to have merit and if it appears that counsel will be needed to assist Plaintiff, the Court may ask an attorney to appear pro bono on Plaintiff’s behalf at a later date. It is therefore ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Motion for Appointment of Counsel (Docket No. 15) is DENIED. DATED this 13th day of August, 2015. BY THE COURT: Ted Stewart 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.
