Legal Opinion
Edom Williams v. Carl White
Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
Decided April 30, 1990No. 89-3032PublishedCited by 26 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
LAY, Chief Judge.
Petitioner originally applied to this court for permission to proceed in forma pauper-is. This panel granted the application, and the matter is now before us on petitioner’s motion for appointment of counsel. We deny the motion for appointment of counsel in this court. However, we remand this case to the district court for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.
It is the decision of the court not to appoint counsel at this stage of the proceedings. Petitioner’s claim is a pro se claim filed under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (1982). The claim was dismissed by the district court…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Haines v. KernerSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Neitzke v. WilliamsSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
- Hughes v. RoweSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
- Hutto v. FinneySupreme Court of the United States · 1979
- Harry Lawrence Williams, Sr. v. Gordon H. FaulknerCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1988
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by26 opinions
- Roman v. JeffesCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1990
- Roman v. JeffesCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1990
- Moore v. JacksonCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1997
- Russell E. Carney v. Robert Houston Harold Clark Linda Lenard Wilber Newell Department of CorrectionsCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1994
- Timothy Allan Divers v. Department of Corrections Jim M. Jones, Larry DittmerCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1990
21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.