Eldridge #147718 v. Schroeder
ORDER denying 24 Motion for Appointment of Counsel. (See document for further details). Signed by Magistrate Judge Eileen S Willett on 4/22/15. (LAD)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA
Joseph Gerald Lee Eldridge,
No. CV14-01325-DGC (ESW)
Pending before the Court is Plaintiff’s Motion for Appointment of Counsel (Doc.
24). Plaintiff asserts that his case in complex, his ability to litigate is limited by his
incarceration and hospitalization, credibility will be an issue regarding the witnesses,
Plaintiff is indigent, Plaintiff is not trained in the law, Plaintiff has a seizure disorder, and
Plaintiff needs assistance with expert witnesses.
There is no constitutional right to the appointment of counsel in a civil case. See
Johnson v. U.S. Dep’t of Treasury, 939 F.2d 820, 824 (9th Cir. 1991); Ivey v. Bd of
Regents of the Univ. of Alaska, 673 F.2d 266, 269 (9th Cir. 1982). “However, a court
may under ‘exceptional circumstances’ appoint counsel for indigent civil litigants
pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1).” Palmer v. Valdez, 560 F.3d 965, 970 (9th Cir.
2009) (quoting Agyeman v. Coors. Corp. of Am., 390 F.3d 1101, 1103 (9th Cir. 2004)).
“When determining whether ‘exceptional circumstances’ exist, a court must consider ‘the
likelihood of success on the merits as well as the ability of the [plaintiff] to articulate his
claims pro se in light of the complexity of the legal issues involved.’” Palmer, 560 F.3d
at 970 (quoting Weygandt v. Look, 718 F.2d 952, 954 (9th Cir. 1983)). See also Terrell v.
Brewer, 935 F.2d 1015, 1017 (9th Cir. 1991).
dispositive and instead must be viewed together.” Palmer, 560 F3.d at 970 (citing
Wilborn v. Escalderon, 789 F.2d 1328, 1331 (9th Cir. 1986)).
“Neither of these considerations is
Having considered both elements, Plaintiff has not shown that exceptional
circumstances are present that would require the appointment of counsel in this case.
Plaintiff has not demonstrated a likelihood of success on the merits, nor has he shown
that he is experiencing difficulty in litigating this case because of the complexity of the
issues involved. Plaintiff’s filings with the Court, as well as the instant motion, indicate
that Plaintiff is capable of navigating his proceedings and presenting arguments to the
Court. See Wilborn, 789 F.2d at 1331 (“If all that was required to establish successfully
the complexity of the relevant issues was a demonstration of the need for development of
further facts, practically all cases would involve complex legal issues.”). Plaintiff is in no
different position that many pro se prisoner litigants.
exceptional circumstances are present, Plaintiff’s request for appointment of counsel will
be denied. Accordingly,
Having failed to show that
IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Motion for Appointment of Counsel (Doc. 24) is
Dated this 22nd day of April, 2015.
Honorable Eileen S. Willett
United States Magistrate Judge
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?