Dantes v. Stanford Hospital and Clinics

Filing 47

Order Granting Motion to Appoint Counsel for Limited-Scope Representation. Signed by Magistrate Judge Howard R. Lloyd on 5/26/16. (hrllc1S, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/26/2016)

Download PDF
E-Filed 5/26/16 1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 MARIE ENCAR ARNOLD DANTES, Plaintiff, 8 9 10 v. STANFORD HEALTH CARE, United States District Court Northern District of California 13 ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO APPOINT COUNSEL FOR LIMITEDSCOPE REPRESENTATION Defendant. 11 12 Case No. 15-cv-05951-HRL Plaintiff Marie Dantes (“Dantes”) moves the court to appoint counsel for the limited purpose of representing her at a settlement conference set for June 6, 2016. 14 Dantes asserts that: (1) she has no lawyer; (2) she lacks the financial resources necessary to 15 hire a lawyer; (3) she has “contacted approximately 30 lawyers” without “those consultations” 16 leading to representation; and (4) her case “warrants pro bono representation because an attorney 17 could help [her]” to understand her case, to negotiate at the settlement conference, and to 18 understand any proposed settlement agreement. In addition, the Staff Attorney at the Federal Pro 19 Se Program states that he consulted with Dantes and that he believes she would benefit from the 20 limited-scope representation she requests. 21 The court is satisfied, pursuant to General Order 25, that the motion should be granted as 22 follows: (1) the Federal Pro Se Program shall attempt to secure the services of a suitable volunteer 23 attorney; and (2) if a suitable volunteer is found, the court will appoint the volunteer for the 24 limited purpose of representing Dantes in the course of the upcoming settlement conference. 25 26 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: 5/26/16 27 28 HOWARD R. LLOYD United States Magistrate Judge

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?