Brown v. Jewell et al
Filing
9
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Carolyn K. Delaney on 4/14/16 ORDERING that plaintiff's request for the appointment of counsel 8 is denied. (Becknal, R)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11
MARILEE BROWN,
12
13
14
15
No. 2:16-cv-0637 MCE CKD PS
Plaintiff,
v.
ORDER
SALLY JEWELL, et al.,
Defendants.
16
17
Plaintiff brings this action challenging her termination from employment with the federal
18
government. Plaintiff has requested appointment of counsel. Although plaintiff does not cite a
19
specific statute in support of her request for counsel, it appears plaintiff is requesting appointment
20
of counsel pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5(f)(1)(B).
21
Any successful application for appointment of counsel must comply with criteria set forth
22
in Bradshaw v. Zoological Society of San Diego, 662 F.2d 1301 (9th Cir. 1981). Before
23
appointing counsel to plaintiff, the court must consider (1) plaintiff’s financial resources, (2) the
24
efforts already made by plaintiff to secure counsel, and (3) plaintiff’s likelihood of success on the
25
merits. Id. at 1318. Appointment of counsel is not a matter of right. See Ivey v. Board of
26
Regents, 673 F. 2d 266 (9th Cir. 1982).
27
As discussed in the order directing plaintiff to pay the filing fee, plaintiff’s financial
28
resources do not weigh in favor of appointment of counsel. Plaintiff indicates she has paid
1
1
counsel in other matters but does not describe her efforts to secure counsel in the present action.
2
After reviewing the amended complaint, the court has determined appointment of counsel is not
3
warranted in this matter.
4
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff’s request for the appointment of
5
counsel (ECF No. 8) is denied.
6
Dated: April 14, 2016
_____________________________________
CAROLYN K. DELANEY
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
7
8
9
10
4 brown0637.bradshaw.cou
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
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?