Discretionary appointment of counsel
While a state may have many statutes, court decisions, or court rules governing appointment of counsel for a particular subject area, a "Key Development" is a statute/decision/rule that prevails over the others (example: a state high court decision finding a categorical right to counsel in guardianships cases takes precedence over a statute saying appointment in guardianship cases is discretionary).
Legislation, Housing - Discrimination
A court may appoint counsel for either side in a housing discrimination case. Del. Code tit. 6 § 4613(b).
In Shahin v. City of Dover, 2018 Del. Ch. LEXIS 322, *4 (Del. Chanc. Ct. 2018), the court commented, “I have been unable to find cases addressing the circumstances under which appointment of counsel under Section 4613(a) is warranted, particularly where the plaintiff acknowledges that he is able to afford legal counsel. With regard to indigent party applications under similar statutes or circumstances, our state and federal courts have considered certain factors in determining whether to appoint counsel to prosecute a ‘claim [that] has arguable merit in fact and law.’” The court cited to cases that looked at the difficulty of the legal issues, the plaintiff’s ability to present the case, the degree to which factual investigation is necessary, the plaintiff's capacity to retain counsel on his own behalf, the extent to which a case is likely to turn on credibility determinations; and whether the case will require testimony from expert witnesses.
If "yes", the established right to counsel or discretionary appointment of counsel is limited in some way, including any of: the only authority is a lower/intermediate court decision or a city council, not a high court or state legislature; there has been a subsequent case that has cast doubt; a statute is ambiguous; or the right or discretionary appointment is not for all types of individuals or proceedings within that category.
Appointment of Counsel: discretionary Qualified: no