Tafilele v. Harrington et al
ORDER DENYING Motion for Appointment of Counsel 65 , signed by Magistrate Judge Dennis L. Beck on 8/6/13: Motion is DENIED without prejudice. (Hellings, J)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
11 ASOFA V. TAFILELE,
1:10-cv-01493 LJO DLB (PC)
ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR
APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL
14 HARRINGTON, et al.,
On August 2, 2013, Plaintiff filed a motion seeking the appointment of counsel. Plaintiff
18 does not have a constitutional right to appointed counsel in this action, Rand v. Rowland, 113
19 F.3d 1520, 1525 (9th Cir. 1997), and the court cannot require an attorney to represent Plaintiff
20 pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1). Mallard v. United States District Court for the Southern
21 District of Iowa, 490 U.S. 296, 298, 109 S.Ct. 1814, 1816 (1989). However, in certain
22 exceptional circumstances the court may request the voluntary assistance of counsel pursuant to
23 section 1915(e)(1). Rand, 113 F.3d at 1525.
Without a reasonable method of securing and compensating counsel, the Court will seek
25 volunteer 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 success
27 of the merits [and] the ability of the [plaintiff] to articulate his claims pro se in light of the
28 complexity of the legal issues involved.” Id. (internal quotation marks and citations omitted).
In the present case, the court does not find the required exceptional circumstances. Even
2 if it is assumed that Plaintiff is not well versed in the law and that he has made serious
3 allegations which, if proved, would entitle him to relief, his case is not exceptional. This court is
4 faced with similar cases almost daily. Further, based on a review of the record in this case, the
5 court does not find that Plaintiff cannot adequately articulate his claims. Id.
For the foregoing reasons, Plaintiff’s motion for the appointment of counsel is HEREBY
7 DENIED, without prejudice.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
August 6, 2013
/s/ Dennis L. Beck
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?