Trotter v. Curiel
ORDER denying 7 Motion to Appoint Counsel signed by Magistrate Judge Michael J. Seng on 10/22/2010. (Lundstrom, T)
(PC) Trotter v. Curiel, et al.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 JAMES TROTTER, 9 10 v. 11 R. THOMAS, et al., (ECF No. 7) 12 Defendants. 13 ________________________________/ 14 15 On October 12, 2010, Plaintiff filed a motion seeking the appointment of counsel. (ECF No. 7.) Plaintiff does not have a constitutional right to appointed counsel in this Plaintiff, ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL 1:10-cv-01547-MJS (PC) IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
16 action, Rand v. Rowland, 113 F.3d 1520, 1525 (9th Cir. 1997), and the Court cannot 17 require an attorney to represent Plaintiff. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1); Mallard v. United 18 States District Court for the Southern District of Iowa, 490 U.S. 296, 298, 109 S.Ct. 1814, 19 1816 (1989). However, in certain exceptional circumstances the Court may request the 20 voluntary assistance of counsel. Rand, 113 F.3d at 1525. 21 Without a reasonable method of securing and compensating counsel, the Court will
22 seek volunteer counsel only in the most serious and exceptional cases. In determining 23 whether "exceptional circumstances exist, the district court must evaluate both the 24 likelihood of success of the merits [and] the ability of the [plaintiff] to articulate his claims 25 pro se in light of the complexity of the legal issues involved." Id. (internal quotation marks 26 and citations omitted). 27 In the present case, the Court does not find the required exceptional circumstances.
28 Even if it is assumed that Plaintiff is not well versed in the law and that he has made -1Dockets.Justia.com
1 serious allegations which, if proved, would entitle him to relief, his case is not exceptional. 2 This Court is faced with similar cases almost daily. Further, at this early stage in the 3 proceedings, the Court cannot make a determination that Plaintiff is likely to succeed on 4 the merits, and based on a review of the record in this case, the Court does not find that 5 Plaintiff cannot adequately articulate his claims. Id. 6 For the foregoing reasons, Plaintiff's motion for the appointment of counsel is
7 HEREBY DENIED, without prejudice. 8 9 IT IS SO ORDERED. 10 Dated: 97k110 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 -2October 22, 2010 /s/ UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Michael J. Seng
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?