Thaler v. Amador County, California et al

Filing 9

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Gregory G. Hollows on 11/21/14 denying 8 Motion to Appoint Counsel. (Dillon, M)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

CARSON THALER,

12

Plaintiff,

13
14

No. 2:14-cv-2013 MCE GGH PS

v.

ORDER

AMADOR COUNTY, et al.,

15

Defendants.

16
17

Presently before the court is plaintiff’s request for appointment of counsel.

18

The district court has discretion under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1) to request counsel to

19

represent an indigent civil litigant. First, however, the court must evaluate both (1) the likelihood

20

of success on the merits and (2) the ability of the plaintiff to articulate his claims pro se in light of

21

the complexity of the legal issues involved. See, e.g., Terrell v. Brewer, 935 F.2d 1015, 1017

22

(9th Cir. 1991). On the record before it, the court cannot find a likelihood of success on the

23

merits. See Franklin v. Murphy, 745 F.2d 1221, 1236 (9th Cir.1984) (motions to appoint counsel

24

granted only in exceptional circumstances and at discretion of trial court).

25

\\\\\

26

\\\\\

27

\\\\\

28

\\\\\
1

1

Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that plaintiff’s November 14, 2014 request for

2

appointment of counsel is denied.

3

Dated: November 21, 2014

4

/s/ Gregory G. Hollows

5

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

6

GGH:076/Thaler2013.appt

7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2