Hampton v. Sahota, et al
Filing
91
ORDER signed by Judge John A. Mendez on 12/14/2011 ORDERING that plaintiff's 86 request for reconsideration and renewed request for appointment of counsel is denied. (Zignago, K.)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
8
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
9
ARMSTER HAMPTON,
10
Plaintiff,
11
vs.
12
No. 2:06-cv-0966 JAM KJN P
P. SAHOTA, et al.,
13
14
15
Defendants.
ORDER
/
On March 26, 2009, the Magistrate Judge issued an order denying plaintiff’s
16
motion for counsel. On December 2, 2011, plaintiff filed a request for reconsideration of that
17
order. Local Rule 303(b), states “rulings by Magistrate Judges shall be final if no reconsideration
18
thereof is sought from the Court within fourteen days . . . from the date of service of the ruling on
19
the parties. . .” E.D. Local Rule 303(b). Plaintiff’s request for reconsideration of the magistrate
20
judge’s order of March 26, 2009, is therefore untimely.
21
To the extent plaintiff’s motion for reconsideration can be construed as a renewed
22
motion for appointment of counsel, the United States Supreme Court has ruled that district courts
23
lack authority to require counsel to represent indigent prisoners in § 1983 cases. Mallard v.
24
United States Dist. Court, 490 U.S. 296, 298 (1989). In certain exceptional circumstances, the
25
court may request the voluntary assistance of counsel pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1). Terrell
26
v. Brewer, 935 F.2d 1015, 1017 (9th Cir. 1991); Wood v. Housewright, 900 F.2d 1332, 1335-36
(9th Cir. 1990). In the present case, the court does not find the required exceptional
1
circumstances. Therefore, plaintiff’s request for the appointment of counsel is denied.
2
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff’s December 2, 2011
3
request for reconsideration and renewed request for appointment of counsel (Dkt. No. 86) is
4
denied.
5
DATED:
December 14, 2011
6
/s/ John A. Mendez
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
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?