Bernard L. Smith v. ADE-WIFCO Steel Products, et al.

Summary

The United States District Court for the District of Kansas denied pro se plaintiff Bernard L. Smith’s second motion for appointment of counsel in an employment discrimination action. Applying the factors governing appointment of counsel in civil cases, the court found that although plaintiff had proceeded in forma pauperis and diligently sought counsel, his ability to present the case and the unresolved merits did not support appointment.

Holdings

1. Appointment of counsel was not warranted because, despite Smith's indigence and diligence in seeking counsel, the unresolved merits factor was nondeterminative and Smith had not shown that he lacked the capacity to investigate and present his claims without counsel.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the court should appoint counsel for an indigent pro se plaintiff in a civil employment-discrimination action under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1).
2. Whether the Castner factors—financial ability, diligence in seeking counsel, merits, and capacity to investigate and present the case—supported appointment of counsel.

Disposition

other