Musselman v. Department of the Army

United States District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas

Musselman v. Department of the Army

Trial Court Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS CENTRAL DIVISION

JEFFERY SCOTT MUSSELMAN PLAINTIFF

VS. 4:22-CV-01216-BRW

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY, Christine Wormuth, Secretary DEFENDANT ORDER

Plaintiff’s Motion to Proceed In Forma Pauperis (Doc. No. 1) is DENEID and this case is DISMISSED without prejudice. Plaintiff’s economic status does not support a finding of indigency. Although he has two dependents and a number of fixed expenses, he reports that he earns over $7,000.00 a month in disability, social security, and retirement income. If Plaintiff wants to continue this case, he must submit the statutory filing fee of $402.00 to the Clerk of the Court, noting the above case style and number within thirty days of the date of this Order, together with a Motion to Reopen the case. Upon receipt of the motion and full payment, the case will be reopened. Plaintiff’s motion for appointment of counsel (Doc. No. 3) is DENIED. Litigants in civil cases do not have an automatic right to appointed counsel.1 Courts sometimes appoint lawyers in cases where “the nature of the litigation is such that plaintiff as well as the court will benefit from the assistance of counsel.”2 The decision to appoint counsel is based on the circumstances of each case. I have considered the factual and legal complexity of this case and appointment is not warranted at this time. IT IS SO ORDERED this 12th day of December, 2022. Billy Roy Wilson UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

1 Phillips v. Jasper County Jail,

437 F.3d 791, 794

(8th Cir. 2006).

2 Johnson v. Williams,

788 F.2d 1319, 1322

(8th Cir. 1986).

Reference

Status
Unknown