Baltimore v. Haggins

Filing 70

ORDER GRANTING 69 Motion to Appoint Counsel Attorney signed by Magistrate Judge Jennifer L. Thurston on 4/10/2013. Christopher Alan Nedeau for Robert Baltimore added. (Sant Agata, S)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 ROBERT BALTIMORE, 12 13 Case No. 1:10-cv-00931 LJO JLT (PC) Plaintiff, ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO APPOINT COUNSEL v. (Doc. 69) 14 15 CHRISTOPHER HAGGINS Defendant. 16 17 Plaintiff is a California prisoner proceeding pro se with an action for violation of civil 18 rights under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Before the Court is Plaintiff’s renewed motion for appointment of 19 counsel. (Doc. 69) 20 On December 3, 2012, plaintiff filed a motion to appoint counsel. (Doc. 39) On 21 December 6, 2012, the court denied the motion without prejudice. (Doc. 41) On March 27, 2013, 22 plaintiff filed another motion for appointment of counsel. (Doc. 69). At that time, the Court 23 could not make a determination whether Plaintiff was likely to succeed on the merits. However, 24 given the posture of the case at this time, it now appears Plaintiff has presented colorable claims 25 which, if proven, may provide a successful result. 26 Therefore, the Court finds that appointment of counsel for plaintiff is warranted at this 27 time. Veronica L. Harris and Christoper A. Nedeau have been selected from the court’s pro bono 28 attorney panel to represent plaintiff, and they have accepted the appointment. 1 1 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 2 1. Plaintiff’s motion for the appointment of counsel is granted; and 3 2. Veronica L. Harris and Christoper A. Nedeau are appointed as counsel in the 4 above entitled matter. 5 6 IT IS SO ORDERED. 7 8 9 Dated: April 10, 2013 /s/ Jennifer L. Thurston UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE DEAC_Signature-END: 9j7khijed 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2

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?