Charles Eley v. District of Columbia , 971 F.2d 765 ( 1992 )

971 F.2d 765

297 U.S.App.D.C. 302

NOTICE: D.C. Circuit Local Rule 11(c) states that unpublished orders, judgments, and explanatory memoranda may not be cited as precedents, but counsel may refer to unpublished dispositions when the binding or preclusive effect of the disposition, rather than its quality as precedent, is relevant.
Charles ELEY, Appellant,
v.
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, et al.

No. 91-7077.

United States Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit.

June 5, 1992.

Before WALD, D.H. GINSBURG and SENTELLE, Circuit Judges.

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

1

Upon consideration of the motion for summary affirmance and the response thereto, and the motion for appointment of counsel, it is

2

ORDERED that the motion for appointment of counsel be denied. Appointment of counsel in a civil action is exceptional and wholly unwarranted when appellant has not demonstrated any likelihood of success on the merits. See D.C. Circuit Handbook of Practice and Internal Procedures 30 (1987). It is

3

FURTHER ORDERED that the motion for summary affirmance be granted substantially for the reasons stated by the district court in its order filed February 28, 1991. The merits of the parties' positions are so clear as to justify summary action. See Taxpayers Watchdog, Inc. v. Stanley, 819 F.2d 294, 297 (D.C.Cir.1987) (per curiam); Walker v. Washington, 627 F.2d 541, 545 (D.C.Cir.) (per curiam), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 994 (1980).

4

The Clerk is directed to withhold issuance of the mandate herein until seven days after disposition of any timely petition for rehearing. See D.C.Cir.Rule 15.