Salazar v. Kokor et al

Filing 51

ORDER DENYING 50 Motion to Appoint Counsel signed by Magistrate Judge Michael J. Seng on 1/19/2018. (Jessen, A)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11
12
13
14

1:14-cv-00211-AWI-MJS (PC)

EFRAIN SALAZAR,
Plaintiff,

ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR
APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL

v.

(ECF No. 50)

DR. KOKOR,

15

Defendant.

16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25

On January 12, 2018, Plaintiff filed a motion seeking the appointment of counsel.
(ECF No. 50.)
Plaintiff does not have a constitutional right to appointed counsel in this action,
Rand v. Rowland, 113 F.3d 1520, 1525 (9th Cir. 1997), and the Court cannot require an
attorney to represent Plaintiff pursuant to 28 U.S.C. ' 1915(e)(1), Mallard v. United States
District Court for the Southern District of Iowa, 490 U.S. 296, 298 (1989). In certain
exceptional circumstances the court may request the voluntary assistance of counsel
pursuant to section 1915(e)(1). Rand, 113 F.3d at 1525. However, without a reasonable
method of securing and compensating counsel, the Court will seek volunteer counsel

26

only in the most serious and exceptional cases. In determining whether exceptional

27

circumstances exist, the district court must evaluate both the likelihood of success of the

28

1

1

merits [and] the ability of the [plaintiff] to articulate his claims pro se in light of the

2

complexity of the legal issues involved. Id. (internal quotation marks and citations

3

omitted).

4

In the present case, the Court does not find the required exceptional

5

circumstances. Even if it is assumed that Plaintiff is not well versed in the law and that

6

he has made serious allegations which, if proved, would entitle him to relief, his case is

7

not exceptional. This Court is faced with similar cases almost daily. Further, the Court

8

cannot make a determination that Plaintiff is likely to succeed on the merits. And, based

9

on a review of the record in this case, even though the issues are complex, the court

10
11
12

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 DENIED, without prejudice.

13
IT IS SO ORDERED.
14
15

Dated:

January 19, 2018

/s/

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

Michael J. Seng

2