Matthews v. California Department of Corrections et al

Filing 33

ORDER denying 31 Motion to Appoint Counsel signed by Magistrate Judge Kimberly J. Mueller on 01/06/10. (Plummer, M)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 vs. CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, et al., Defendants. / ORDER IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SCOTT CHARLES MATTHEWS, Plaintiff, No. CIV S-07-1418 GEB KJM P Plaintiff has requested the appointment of counsel. The United States Supreme Court has ruled that district courts lack authority to require counsel to represent indigent prisoners in 1983 cases. Mallard v. United States Dist. Court, 490 U.S. 296, 298 (1989). In certain exceptional circumstances, the court may request the voluntary assistance of counsel pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1915(e)(1). Terrell 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 circumstances. Plaintiff's request for the appointment of counsel will therefore be denied. Plaintiff has also asked why no defendants apart from defendant Hui have responded to the complaint. In its screening order, the court found service of the complaint appropriate for defendant Hui only. Docket No. 23. 1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 2/md matt1418.31 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff's request for the appointment of counsel (Docket No. 31) is denied. DATED: January 6, 2010. 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?