Paul Lamont Parham v. Marshall Johnson, Jr., Medical Doctor Charles J. Kozakieqicz Tom Forester, Commissioner Joseph Mazurkiewicz, ph.d

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• instructing that while these factors are “not always determinative,” they “should be considered in each meritorious case”
• instructing that, in analyzing the complexity of the legal issues for purposes of appointing counsel, “courts must still look to the proof going towards the ultimate issue and the discovery issues involved”
• noting that the denial of a motion for appointment of counsel is reviewed for abuse of discretion
• noting that many medical malpractice cases “require expert testimony” because such cases “involve[] complex facts and medical records that even most lawyers struggle to comprehend”
• noting that “[t]his list of factors is not exhaustive … [and] should serve as a guidepost”
• noting that “[t]his list of factors is not exhaustive … [and] should serve as a guidepost”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).