IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
October 16, 2007
ELLA MAE HENDERSON, PLAINTIFF V. MRS. KERNS-BARR & OFFICER RIPPEY, DEFENDANTS
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Judge Conner
AND NOW, this 16th day of October, 2007, upon consideration of the correspondence from pro se plaintiff dated October 11, 2007 (Doc. 24), requesting that counsel be appointed to assist plaintiff in litigating the above-captioned case, and it appearing that resolution of plaintiff's claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 neither implicates complex legal or factual issues nor requires significant factual investigation or the testimony of expert witnesses, see Tabron v. Grace, 6 F.3d 147, 155-57 (3d Cir. 1993) (listing factors relevant to a request for counsel), it is hereby ORDERED that:
1. Plaintiff's correspondence (Doc. 24) is CONSTRUED as a second motion for appointment of counsel and is DENIED as so construed. See Parham v. Johnson, 126 F.3d 454, 456-57 (3d Cir. 1997) (holding that prisoners have no constitutional rights to appointment of counsel in a civil case).
2. Should further proceedings demonstrate the need for counsel, the matter may be reconsidered either sua sponte or upon a motion by plaintiff. See Tabron, 6 F.3d at 156.
CHRISTOPHER C. CONNER United States District Judge
© 1992-2007 VersusLaw Inc.