Van Buren v. Willard et al
Filing
37
ORDER DENYING 36 Motion to Appoint Counsel signed by Magistrate Judge Dennis L. Beck on 12/8/2014. (Sant Agata, S)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11
IRVIN VAN BUREN,
12
13
14
15
16
17
Plaintiff,
v.
EMERSON,
Defendant.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Case No.: 1:13-cv-01273-LJO-DLB (PC)
ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION
FOR APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL
(Document 36)
Plaintiff Irvin Ban Buren (“Plaintiff”) is a prisoner in the custody of the California Department
18
of Corrections and Rehabilitation (“CDCR”). Plaintiff is proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in
19
this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
On December 4, 2014, Plaintiff filed a motion for the appointment of counsel.
Plaintiff does not have a constitutional right to the appointment of counsel in this action.
Palmer v. Valdez, 560 F.3d 965, 970 (9th Cir. 2009); Storseth v. Spellman, 654 F.2d 1349, 1353 (9th
Cir. 1981). The Court may request the voluntary assistance of counsel pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §
1915(e)(1), but it will do so only if exceptional circumstances exist. Palmer, 560 F.3d at 970; Wilborn
v. Escalderon, 789 F.2d 1328, 1331 (9th Cir. 1986). In making this determination, the Court must
evaluate the likelihood of success on the merits and the ability of Plaintiff to articulate his claims pro
se in light of the complexity of the legal issues involved. Palmer, 560 F.3d at 970 (citation and
28
1
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
quotation marks omitted); Wilborn, 789 F.2d at 1331. Neither consideration is dispositive and they
must be viewed together. Palmer, 560 F.3d at 970 (citation and quotation marks omitted); Wilborn,
789 F.2d at 1331.
In the present case, the Court does not find the required exceptional circumstances. Even if it
is assumed that Plaintiff is not well versed in the law and that he has made serious allegations which, if
proved, would entitle him to relief, his case is not exceptional. The Court is faced with similar cases
almost daily. Moreover, the Court does not find that Plaintiff cannot adequately articulate his claims.
8
To the extent that Plaintiff believes that he may have difficulty in discovery, this is not grounds
9
for the appointment of counsel.
10
Therefore, Plaintiff’s request for the appointment of counsel is HEREBY DENIED.
11
12
IT IS SO ORDERED.
13
14
Dated:
/s/ Dennis
December 8, 2014
L. Beck
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
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?