Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges

James Renwick MANSHIP, Sr., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Richard TRODDEN, Commonwealth Attorney; Officer Toomey, Arlington Police; M. Douglas Scott, Chief of Police; Beth Arthur, Sheriff; William Newman, Judge; Ser

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

James Renwick Manship, Sr., appeals the district court's order dismissing his complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B) (2000) for failure to state a claim. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Manship v. Trodden, No. 1:07-cv-00772-TSE-TCB, 2007 WL 3143559 (E.D. Va. Oct. 22, 2007). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

Manship also complains that the district court did not specifically respond to his request for a court-appointed attorney. Although under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1) (2000), a court may request an attorney to represent an indigent party in a civil case, a court should do so only in exceptional circumstances. Cook v. Bounds, 518 F.2d 779, 780 (4th Cir. 1975). The district court's determination that Manship did not present exceptional circumstances warranting appointment of counsel was implicit in the dismissal of his complaint.

AFFIRMED.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

MANSHIP v. TRODDEN
(Apr 15, 2008)