Chan v. County of Sacramento et al

Filing 97

ORDER denying 95 Motion to Appoint Counsel signed by Magistrate Judge Gregory G. Hollows on 11/20/11. (Plummer, M)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10

MADY CHAN,
Plaintiff,

11
12
13
14
15
16

No. CIV S-09-2006 MCE GGH P

vs.
COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO, et al.,
Defendants.

ORDER
/

Plaintiff has requested the appointment of counsel. The United States Supreme

17

Court has ruled that district courts lack authority to require counsel to represent indigent

18

prisoners in § 1983 cases. Mallard v. United States Dist. Court, 490 U.S. 296, 298 (1989). In

19

certain exceptional circumstances, the court may request the voluntary assistance of counsel

20

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1). Terrell v. Brewer, 935 F.2d 1015, 1017 (9th Cir. 1991);

21

Wood v. Housewright, 900 F.2d 1332, 1335-36 (9th Cir. 1990). In the present case, the court

22

does not find the required exceptional circumstances. The court notes that plaintiff has filed

23

many other requests for the appointment of counsel which have all been denied and plaintiff has

24

skillfully pursued this litigation which is rather straightforward. The court has already appointed

25

an independent dentist to provide a report, but the appointment of counsel is not warranted at this

26

time. Plaintiff’s motion for the appointment of counsel will therefore be denied.
1

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff’s November 3, 2011

1
2

motion for the appointment of counsel (Docket No. 95) is denied.

3

DATED: November 20, 2011
/s/ Gregory G. Hollows
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

4
5
GGH:mp

6

chan2006.31

7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
2