Soto v. Duel Vocational Institution et al

Filing 74

ORDER denying 73 Motion to Appoint Counsel signed by Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan on 08/11/11. (Plummer, M)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

8

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

9

WILLIAM SOTO,
Plaintiff,

10
11
12
13

No. CIV S-07-1842 FCD EFB P

vs.
DR. ZHOV,
Defendant.

ORDER
/

14
15

Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding without counsel in an action brought under 42

16

U.S.C. § 1983. He has requested that the court appoint counsel. District courts lack authority to

17

require counsel to represent indigent prisoners in section 1983 cases. Mallard v. United States

18

Dist. Court, 490 U.S. 296, 298 (1989). In exceptional circumstances, the court may request

19

counsel voluntarily to represent such a plaintiff. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1); Terrell v. Brewer, 935

20

F.2d 1015, 1017 (9th Cir. 1991); Wood v. Housewright, 900 F.2d 1332, 1335-36 (9th Cir. 1990).

21

The court finds that there are no exceptional circumstances in this case. Plaintiff is informed that

22

he may conduct defendants’ depositions by written questions pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 31.

23

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff’s August 4, 2011 request for

24

appointment of counsel is denied.

25

DATED: August 11, 2011.

26