United States District Court

for the

Southern District of Florida

Walter James Morris, Jr., Plaintiff,

v.

Ms. Hightower, Director of the 

Medical Department for Dade C.I., 

Defendant.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Civil Action No. 20-22502-Civ-Scola

Order

This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff Walter James Morris Jr.’s 

motion to appeal in forma pauperis and to appoint counsel. (ECF No. 16.) The

motion is denied. (ECF No. 16.)

Plaintiff filed a civil rights complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, the 

Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”) and the Rehabilitation Act. The 

complaint alleged the Medical Director for the state of Florida’s Dade Criminal 

Institution discriminated against the Plaintiff when she did not provide the 

Plaintiff with a new neck collar, wheelchair cushion and back brace because 

the Plaintiff is “gender-neutral, and not [] gender-based.” (ECF No. 1 at 2.) This 

Court dismissed Plaintiff’s claims as frivolous because they had no arguable

merit in law or fact despite an earlier opportunity to amend (ECF No. 13.)

Plaintiff filed a notice of appeal to the United States Court of Appeals for the 

Eleventh Circuit. (ECF No. 15.)

A court may authorize a party to proceed in forma pauperis upon an

affidavit of indigency. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a); see Fed. R. App. P. 24(a)(1). 

An appeal, however, may not be taken in forma pauperis if it is not taken in 

good faith. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3); accord Fed. R. App. P. 24(a)(3)(A). A party 

who seeks appellate review of an issue does so in good faith if the issue is 

not frivolous. Higgins v. Altonaga, No. 18-22026-CIV, 2018 WL 10705854, at *1 

(S.D. Fla. June 4, 2018) (Cooke, J.). An appeal filed in forma pauperis is 

frivolous if “it appears that the Plaintiff has little or no chance of success,” in 

other words that the “factual allegations are clearly baseless or that the legal 

theories are indisputably meritless.” Id. (citing Carroll v. Gross, 984 F.2d 392, 

393 (11th Cir. 1993)).

Plaintiff’s claims are frivolous and thus, the Plaintiff may not appeal in 

forma pauperis. The complaint fails to allege any cognizable claim under the 

ADA, Rehabilitation Act, or Section 1983. The complaint does not allege that 

being gender neutral resulted from physical impairments, accordingly, the 

Case 1:20-cv-22502-RNS Document 18 Entered on FLSD Docket 02/10/2021 Page 1 of 2
complaint does not allege a recognized disability under the ADA or 

Rehabilitation Act. Shorter v. Barr, 2020 WL 1942785, at *10 (N.D. Fla. Mar. 

13, 2020), report and recommendation adopted, 2020 WL 1942300 (N.D. Fla. 

Apr. 22, 2020). Moreover, even if the ADA and Rehabilitation Act did protect

against discrimination based on Gender Dysphoria, the Plaintiff’s demands for 

new medical equipment do not appear to have a nexus to Gender Dysphoria. 

Finally, in the absence of a clearly established right to replacement medical 

equipment such as equipment requested here, the Plaintiff has failed to 

adequately allege a violation of Section 1983. For these reasons, the Plaintiff’s 

claims are frivolous and the motion to proceed in forma pauperis must be 

denied. 

The Plaintiff’s motion for appointment of counsel is likewise denied. “A 

plaintiff in a civil case has no constitutional right to counsel.” Bass v. Perrin, 

170 F.3d 1312, 1320 (11th Cir. 1999). Under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1), the

district court has discretion to appoint counsel for an indigent plaintiff, but

counsel should be appointed only in exceptional circumstances. See Steele v.

Shah, 87 F.3d 1266, 1271 (11th Cir. 1996); Bass, 170 F.3d at 1320.

Exceptional circumstances generally exist “where the facts and legal issues are

so novel or complex as to require the assistance of a trained practitioner.” See

Fowler v. Jones, 899 F.2d 1088, 1096 (11th Cir. 1990). Here, the Plaintiff has 

not shown that this case is exceptionally complex nor that he is unable to 

present his cause without the help of a trained practitioner. Therefore, the 

Clerk declines to appoint counsel to the Plaintiff. Accordingly, the Court denies

Plaintiff’s motion to appoint counsel and to proceed in forma pauperis on 

appeal. (ECF No. 16.)

Done and ordered, in chambers, in Miami, Florida, on February 9, 2021.

Robert N. Scola, Jr.

United States District Judge

Copies, via U.S. Mail, to:

Walter James Morris, Jr.

Inmate #080383

Dade Correctional Institution

Inmate Mail/Parcels

19000 SW 377th Street

Florida City, FL 33034

Case 1:20-cv-22502-RNS Document 18 Entered on FLSD Docket 02/10/2021 Page 2 of 2