Jordan v. Chapnick et al

Filing 48

ORDER Denying Request For Appointment Of Counsel (ECF No. 47 ), signed by Magistrate Judge Michael J. Seng on 8/4/2010. (Scrivner, E)

(PC) Jordan v. Chapnick et al

Doc. 48

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 JAMES JORDAN, 12 13 vs. 14 R. CHAPNICK, (ECF No. 47) 15 Defendant. 16 ________________________________/ 17 On July 28, 2010, Plaintiff James Jordan filed a motion seeking the appointment of Plaintiff, ORDER DENYING REQUEST FOR APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL 1:07-cv-00202-OW W -MJS (PC) IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

18 counsel. Plaintiff does not have a constitutional right to appointed counsel in this action, 19 Rand v. Rowland, 113 F.3d 1520, 1525 (9th Cir. 1997), and the Court cannot require an 20 attorney to represent plaintiff pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1). Mallard v. United States 21 District Court for the Southern District of Iowa, 490 U.S. 296, 298 (1989). 22 In certain exceptional circumstances the Court may request the voluntary assistance

23 of counsel pursuant to section 1915(e)(1). Rand, 113 F.3d at 1525. However,without a 24 reasonable method of securing and compensating counsel, the Court will seek volunteer 25 counsel only in the most serious and exceptional cases. In determining whether

26 "exceptional circumstances exist, the district court must evaluate both the likelihood of 27 success of the merits [and] the ability of the [plaintiff] to articulate his claims pro se in light 28 of the complexity of the legal issues involved." Id. (internal quotation marks and citations -1Dockets.Justia.com

1 omitted). 2 In the present case, the Court does not find the required exceptional circumstances.

3 Even if it is assumed that Plaintiff is not well versed in the law and that he has made 4 serious allegations which, if proved, would entitle him to relief, his case is not exceptional. 5 This Court is faced with similar cases almost daily. Although the Court is sympathetic to 6 the medical conditions that limit Plaintiff's ability to prosecute this action, he has performed 7 adequately thus far. Going forward, if Plaintiff finds that additional time is needed to meet 8 any of the Court's deadlines, he is free to ask the Court for an extension. 9 For the foregoing reasons, Plaintiff's Request for Appointment of Counsel is

10 DENIED. 11 12 IT IS SO ORDERED. 13 Dated: ci4d6 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 -2August 4, 2010 /s/ UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Michael J. Seng