Larsen v. Colvin
Filing
14
ORDER Denying 8 Motion to Appoint Counsel. If the District Judge extends the time to perfect service as this Court recommended, Larsen's 9 motion for such U.S. Marshal support is Granted. Signed by Magistrate Judge Andrew G. Schopler on 5/3/2017. (All non-registered users served via U.S. Mail Service)(rlu)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
Christopher Michael Larsen,
11
Case No.: 16-cv-2847-JM-AGS
Plaintiff,
12
v.
13
Carolyn W. Colvin, Commissioner of
Social Security,
14
15
ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR
USMS SERVICE [Doc. 9] AND
DENYING MOTION FOR
APPOINTED COUNSEL [Doc. 8]
Defendant.
16
17
In a separate Report and Recommendation filed today, this Court recommended
18
denying pro se plaintiff Christopher Larsen’s motion for a default judgment, but granting
19
his motion to extend time to perfect service. If the District Judge disagrees with either
20
recommendation, this case is effectively over. But if the District Judge adopts both
21
recommendations, Larsen’s remaining motions become relevant. Those are adjudicated
22
below.
23
A.
Motion to Direct Service by the U.S. Marshal [Doc. 9]
24
When a “plaintiff is authorized to proceed in forma pauperis”—like Larsen—the
25
Court “must” order that “service be made by a United States marshal or deputy
26
marshal. . . .” Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(c)(3). Thus, if the District Judge extends the time to perfect
27
service as this Court recommended, Larsen’s motion for such U.S. Marshal support is
28
GRANTED. Also, for each individual or entity he wishes to serve, Larsen must provide
1
16-cv-2847-JM-AGS
1
the Marshal with a completed USMS Form 285, a completed summons, and a copy of the
2
complaint. The Clerk shall mail a copy of this order to the U.S. Marshal for the Southern
3
District of California.
4
B.
Motion for Appointed Counsel [Doc. 8]
5
Larsen also requests appointed counsel, explaining that several attorneys have
6
refused to take his case and “the level of stress and frustration inherent in federal lawsuits
7
has worsened some of [his] symptoms.” [Doc. 8, at 2.] “Generally, a plaintiff in a civil
8
case has no right to appointed counsel,” absent a showing of indigency and “exceptional
9
circumstances.” Johnson v. Comm’n of Soc. Sec., Civil No. 3:11-cv-2596-JAH (BLM),
10
2012 WL 124793, at *2 (S.D. Cal. Jan. 17, 2012) (citations omitted); see also 28 U.S.C.
11
§ 1915(e)(1). But see Brinker v. Colvin, 603 F. App’x 609, 610 (9th Cir. 2015) (“The
12
district court did not abuse its discretion in denying Brinker’s motion for appointment of
13
counsel because there are no provisions for supplying counsel at government expense in
14
social security cases.”). “A finding of exceptional circumstances requires an evaluation of
15
both ‘the likelihood of success on the merits and the ability of the petitioner to articulate
16
his claims pro se in light of the complexity of the legal issues involved.’ Neither of these
17
factors is dispositive and both must be viewed together before reaching a decision.” Terrell
18
v. Brewer, 935 F.2d 1015, 1017 (9th Cir. 1991) (citations omitted).
19
Even if Larsen were otherwise entitled to appointed counsel, he has not shown such
20
exceptional circumstances. First, since the administrative record has not yet been filed, the
21
Court cannot independently evaluate Larsen’s likelihood of success on the merits, and
22
Larsen has made no showing on this point. Second, he has thus far articulated his legal
23
position well; his complaint and various motions are clearly and cogently written.
24
Although Larsen appears to have improperly effected service—see the Report and
25
Recommendation filed at the same time as this order—he also identified his error and
26
requested appropriate relief. A single service mistake is not exceptional, especially when
27
the Court ultimately recommends that he be given additional time to remedy the
28
shortcoming. Larsen does not argue otherwise as to these points, but contends that the
2
16-cv-2847-JM-AGS
1
stress of a federal lawsuit has worsened his symptoms. But without more detail, the stress
2
that is an unfortunate and innate characteristic of federal litigation cannot qualify as an
3
exceptional circumstance.
4
5
For these reasons, Larsen’s motion for appointed counsel is DENIED.
Dated: May 3, 2017
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3
16-cv-2847-JM-AGS
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?