Nichols v. Ally Bank

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI
EASTERN DIVISION
CRAIG NICHOLS, JR.,
Plaintiff,
v.
ALLY BANK,
Defendant.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
No. 4:25-cv-00526-SEP
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Before the Court is self-represented Plaintiff Craig Nichols, Jr.’s Application to Proceed
in District Court Without Prepayment of Fees and Costs and Motion to Appoint Counsel. See
Docs. [2], [3]. For the reasons set forth below, the Court denies both motions without prejudice.
Plaintiff has not answered Question 3 on the application, which seeks information
regarding Plaintiff’s income from sources other than gross pay or wages for the last year. He has
checked the box indicating he receives income from a business, profession, or other self-
employment, but has not answered as to the source of money, the amount of money received,
and what he expects to receive in the future. And he has not checked any of the boxes to indicate
whether he receives income from rents, pensions, disability, gifts, or other sources. See Doc. [3]
at 1. As a result, the Court cannot determine whether Plaintiff qualifies to proceed in forma
pauperis and denies without prejudice his application. The Court orders Plaintiff to, no later
than 14 days from the date of this Memorandum and Order, either (1) pay the $405 filing fee or
(2) file a complete application to proceed without prepaying fees and costs, including fully
answering Question 3. Failure to timely pay the filing fee or file a completed application will
result in dismissal of the case without prejudice and without further notice.
The Court also denies Plaintiff’s Motion to Appoint Counsel at this time. Doc. [2]. In
civil cases, a pro se litigant does not have a constitutional or statutory right to appointed counsel.
Ward v. Smith, 721 F.3d 940, 942 (8th Cir. 2013). When determining whether to appoint counsel
for an indigent litigant, a court considers such relevant factors as the complexity of the case, the
ability of the litigant to investigate the facts, the existence of conflicting testimony, and the
ability of the litigant to present his or her claims. Phillips v. Jasper Cnty. Jail, 437 F.3d 791, 794
Case: 4:25-cv-00526-SEP Doc. #: 6 Filed: 02/19/26 Page: 1 of 2 PageID #:
<pageID>

2
(8th Cir. 2006). After reviewing these factors, the Court finds that appointment of counsel is not
warranted at this time. Plaintiff has thus far demonstrated that he can adequately present his
claims to the Court. And neither the factual nor the legal issues in this case appear to be
complex. The Court may entertain a request for appointment of counsel later in the case if
circumstances change.
Accordingly,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Application to Proceed in District Court
Without Prepayment of Fees and Costs, Doc. [3], is DENIED without prejudice. The Court
orders Plaintiff to, within 14 days of the date of this Memorandum and Order, either (1) pay the
$405 filing fee or (2) file a complete application to proceed in district court without prepaying
fees or costs.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk shall provide Plaintiff a copy of the Court-
provided form for seeking leave to proceed without prepaying fees or costs.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Motion for Appointment of Counsel, Doc.
[2], is DENIED without prejudice.
IT IS FINALLY ORDERED that, if Plaintiff does not comply with this Memorandum
and Order, this matter will be dismissed without prejudice.
Dated this 19th day of February 2026.
_______________________________________
SARAH E. PITLYK
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Case: 4:25-cv-00526-SEP Doc. #: 6 Filed: 02/19/26 Page: 2 of 2 PageID #:
<pageID>