Justin Pour v. Utah Army National Guard, et al.

Summary

The United States District Court for the District of Utah denied Justin Pour’s motion for appointment of counsel under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1). The court concluded that his constitutional claims, factual issues, and lack of legal experience did not justify appointment of counsel and that he appeared capable of proceeding pro se.

Holdings

1. A civil litigant has no constitutional right to appointed counsel; appointment of counsel in a civil case is discretionary.
2. Pour did not justify appointment of counsel because his constitutional claims and factual issues were not unusually complex, the merits were not yet apparent, and he appeared capable of prosecuting the action.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the court should appoint counsel for an indigent pro se civil litigant under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1).
2. Whether the merits, factual and legal complexity, and Pour's ability to present his claims justified discretionary appointment of counsel.

Disposition

other