## Facts

- Earl Bothwell, a Nebraska inmate, filed a diversity action asserting Nebraska-law strict products liability and breach of implied warranty claims against Republic Tobacco Co. and Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp. based on injuries allegedly caused by “roll-your-own” loose tobacco.
- Bothwell moved to proceed in forma pauperis and requested appointment of counsel.
- The court granted in forma pauperis status, allowed the complaint to be filed, and later appointed attorney Paula Metcalf to represent Bothwell.
- Metcalf moved to reconsider and vacate the appointment, arguing the court lacked authority to compel an unwilling, uncompensated attorney to represent an indigent civil litigant.
- The memorandum and order addressed only whether the appointment should stand, not the merits of Bothwell’s tort claims.

## Issues

1. Whether a federal district court has inherent authority to require an unwilling attorney to accept an uncompensated civil appointment for an indigent litigant.
2. If such inherent authority exists, whether it should be exercised to compel Metcalf to continue representing Bothwell in this case.

## Decision

- The court held that federal courts possess inherent authority, in appropriate circumstances, to require attorneys to accept civil appointments for indigent litigants.
- The court emphasized that 28 U.S.C. § 1915 authorizes courts to request counsel but does not create a civil right to counsel or provide compensation.
- The court granted Metcalf’s motion and vacated the order appointing her as counsel.
- The underlying products-liability action remained pending; only the counsel-appointment order was set aside.

## Legal Principles

- There is no general constitutional or statutory right to appointed counsel in civil cases, and § 1915 does not supply compensation for appointed attorneys.
- A federal court’s ability to compel attorney service in civil matters, if used at all, rests on the court’s inherent authority to manage proceedings and supervise officers of the court.
- Any compelled appointment power must be exercised sparingly and with attention to fairness to counsel, including the likely burden imposed and the demands of the litigation.
- A court may decline to compel continued representation where the case’s complexity and anticipated workload, combined with lack of compensation, would impose a disproportionate burden on appointed counsel.

## Conclusion

The court recognized an inherent judicial power to compel civil pro bono representation in limited circumstances, but vacated the appointment here because forcing an unwilling attorney to handle a complex products-liability case without compensation was an inappropriate exercise of that power.


Bothwell v. Republic Tobacco Co., 912 F. Supp. 1221 (D. Neb. 1995)