Vigil v. Yates, et al.
Filing
29
ORDER DENYING Motion for Appointment of Counsel 28 , signed by Magistrate Judge Gary S. Austin on 11/6/14: Motion is DENIED without prejudice. (Hellings, J)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11
WILLIE PAUL VIGIL, JR.,
12
13
14
15
Plaintiff,
v.
WARDEN JAMES A. YATES, et al.,
1:10-cv-01977 LJO GSA (PC)
ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR
APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL
(Document# 28)
Defendants.
16
17
On November 6, 2014, plaintiff filed a motion seeking the appointment of counsel.
18
Plaintiff does not have a constitutional right to appointed counsel in this action, Rand v. Rowland,
19
113 F.3d 1520, 1525 (9th Cir. 1997), and the court cannot require an attorney to represent
20
plaintiff pursuant to 28 U.S.C. ' 1915(e)(1). Mallard v. United States District Court for the
21
Southern 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.
24
25
26
27
28
Without a reasonable method of securing and compensating counsel, the court will seek
volunteer counsel only in the most serious and exceptional cases. In determining whether
Aexceptional circumstances exist, the district court must evaluate both the likelihood of success
of the merits [and] the ability of the [plaintiff] to articulate his claims pro se in light of the
complexity of the legal issues involved.@ Id. (internal quotation marks and citations omitted).
1
1
In the present case, the court does not find the required exceptional circumstances. At this
2
early stage in the proceedings, the court cannot make a determination that plaintiff is likely to
3
succeed on the merits. Plaintiff=s third amended complaint, filed on October 1, 2014, awaits
4
screening by the court. (Doc. 27.) Until the third amended complaint is screened and the court
5
finds that Plaintiff states cognizable claims, service of process shall not be initiated upon the
6
defendants. Moreover, based on a review of the record in this case, the court does not find that
7
plaintiff cannot adequately articulate his claims. Plaintiff argues that he cannot afford counsel,
8
9
10
11
the issues in his case are complex, he has limited education and a spelling disability, he suffers
from pain due to disabilities, he has attempted to obtain counsel without success, he has limited
knowledge of the law, and his resources are limited because he is incarcerated. While these
conditions make litigation challenging, they do not amount to exceptional circumstances under
the law. Plaintiff asserts that the third amended complaint concerns claims for excessive force
12
and inadequate medical care. The court is faced with similar cases daily. Therefore, Plaintiff=s
13
motion shall be denied without prejudice to renewal of the motion at a later stage of the
14
15
16
proceedings.
For the foregoing reasons, plaintiff=s motion for the appointment of counsel is HEREBY
DENIED, without prejudice.
17
18
19
20
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:
November 6, 2014
/s/ Gary S. Austin
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
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?