Haines v. Brand et al
Filing
76
ORDER REFERRING Litigant Mark Haines to Federal Pro Bono Project for the limited purpose of representing litigant in the course of settlement conference. Signed by Judge Nathanael Cousins on 6/12/12. (lmh, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/12/2012)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION
MARK HAINES,
Plaintiff,
vs.
DARYL B. BRAND and others,
Defendants.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Case No. 11-cv-01335 YGR
ORDER REFERRING LITIGANT
MARK HAINES TO FEDERAL PRO
BONO PROJECT FOR
APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL
Because pro se defendant Mark Haines has requested and is in need of counsel to
assist him with a settlement conference in this matter and good cause is demonstrated, it is
ORDERED that Haines is referred to the Federal Pro Bono Project office in San Francisco
for referral to a volunteer attorney. The Clerk shall forward this referral to the Project office.
The scope of this referral shall be for:
G
all purposes for the duration of the case
x
the limited purpose of representing the litigant in the course of
G
mediation
G
early neutral evaluation
x
settlement conference
G
briefing G and hearing on the following motion (e.g., motion
for summary judgment or motion to dismiss):
______________________________________________________
G
discovery as follows:
______________________________________________________
______________________________________________________
G
other:
Upon being notified by the Project that an attorney has been located to
represent Haines, that attorney shall be appointed as counsel for the scope of
representation identified above. Upon completion of that limited purpose, the Court
shall issue an order relieving the volunteer attorney from the limited representation of
the litigant.
This Order does not stay the litigation.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: June 12, 2012
N athanael M. Cousins
United States Magistrate Judge
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?