Discretionary appointment

Hawaii , Litigation , Benefits - Claimant

In Asaeda v. Haraguchi, 37 Haw. 583 (Haw. Terr. 1947), a case involving a workman suing for workman’s compensation, the court observed:

The cause shown for the appointment of Mr. Hodgson was that the workman had suffered injuries to his brain which had rendered him unable to take the necessary steps to employ counsel to appear in this court on his behalf and the appointment was made in the exercise of the inherent powers of this court and not pursuant to statutory authority.

Appointment of Counsel: Discretionary
Qualified: Yes
? 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.