Damiani v. Gill. ( 2015 )

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE
IN AND FOR NEW CASTLE COUNTY
PABLO A. DAMIANI, )
Plaintiff, )
v. ) C.A. No. N14C-05-186-ALR
GEORGE GILL (Sergeant) )
Defendant )
Submitted: January 23, 2015
Decided: January 26, 2015
Upon Plaintiff’s Motion for Appointment of Counsel
DENIED
Self-represented litigants in civil proceedings have no legal or equitable
right to appointed counsel.1 Moreover, when the Court applies the analysis set
forth by the Third Circuit Court of Appeals for appointment of counsel, the Court
finds that appointment of counsel is neither necessary nor appropriate, as follows:
(i) plaintiff has demonstrated the ability to present his own case; (ii) plaintiff is in
the nest position to develop the facts on his own behalf; (iii) significant factual
investigation is not necessary as plaintiff is likely is own main witness; (iv) the
case is likely to turn on credibility determinations; (v) expert testimony will not be
1
Montgomery v. Pinchak, 294 F.3d 492, 498 (3d Cir. 2002) (“Indigent civil litigants possess
neither a constitutional nor a statutory right to appointed counsel.”); Parham v. Johnson, 126
F.3d 454, 456-57 (3d Cir. 1997); Boulware v. Battaglia, 344 F. Supp. 889, 903 (D. Del. 1972).
required; and (vi) plaintiff’s inability to afford counsel is not significant under the
circumstances presented.2
NOW, THEREFORE, this 26th day of January, 2015 Plaintiff’s Motion
for Appointment of Counsel is hereby DENIED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Andrea L. Rocanelli
_____________________________
Honorable Andrea L. Rocanelli
2
Parham, 126 F.3d at 457 (delineating the criteria under which an indigent litigant is entitled to
have counsel appointed as developed in Tabron v. Grace, 6 F.3d 147, 155-56, 157 n.5 (3d Cir.
1993)).