UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI SOUTHEASTERN DIVISION RONALD WHITE, ) Plaintiff, ) v. No. 1:21-cv-00037-NCC DR. MICHAEL T. BAUMAN, Defendant. MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This matter comes before the Court on the motion of plaintiff Ronald White for the appointment of counsel. (Docket No. 10). In civil cases, a pro se litigant does not have a constitutional or statutory right to appointed counsel. Ward v. Smith,

(8" Cir. 2013). Rather, a district court may appoint counsel in a civil case if the court is “convinced that an indigent plaintiff has stated a non-frivolous claim...and where the nature of the litigation is such that plaintiff as well as the court will benefit from the assistance of counsel.” Patterson v. Kelley,

(8" Cir. 2018). When determining whether to appoint counsel for an indigent □

litigant, a court considers relevant factors such as the complexity of the case, the ability of the pro se litigant to investigate the facts, the existence of conflicting testimony, and the ability of the pro se litigant to present his or her claim. Phillips v. Jasper Cty. Jail,

(8™ Cir. 2006). After reviewing these factors, the Court finds that the appointment of counsel is not warranted at this time. Plaintiff has demonstrated, at this point, that he can adequately present his claims to the Court. Additionally, the Court is not convinced that plaintiff has stated a non- frivolous claim, or that plaintiff and the Court will benefit from the assistance of counsel. The

Court will entertain future motions for appointment of counsel as the case progresses, if appropriate. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff's motion for appointment of counsel (Docket No. 10) is DENIED at this time. : Dated thig Oot Uiljicl , 2021. tbs Sp RONNIE L. WHITE UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

? :