Burton v. Spring Mountain Treatment Center

Filing 6

ORDER. IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff's 4 application to proceed in forma pauperis is DENIED. Plaintiff must file a renewed application on or before June 10, 2024. The Clerk of Court is kindly directed to send Plaintif f a copy of the short form non-inmate application to proceed in forma pauperis. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED the Plaintiff's 5 motion for appointment of counsel is DENIED. Signed by Magistrate Judge Daniel J. Albregts on 5/10/2024. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - AMMi - cc: IFP application mailed to P per Order.)

1
2

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

3

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

4
5
6
7
8
9
10

***
Ariana Burton,

Case No. 2:24-cv-00449-CDS-DJA
Plaintiff,

v.

Order

Spring Mountain Treatment Center,
Defendant.

11
12

Plaintiff Ariana Burton has submitted an application to proceed in forma pauperis (ECF

13

No. 4) and a motion for appointment of counsel (ECF No. 5). Plaintiff’s application has

14

conflicting information and is incomplete. (ECF No. 4). She states that she is incarcerated at the

15

“Las Vegas Prison” in response to question 1 but then circles that she is not incarcerated but is

16

self employed in response to question 2. (Id. at 1). She then checks the box that she has received

17

income from her self-employment in response to question 3, but lists that she has made no money

18

in response to question 2. (Id.). In response to question 4, asking for the amount of money she

19

has in a checking or savings account, Plaintiff responds, “not saying.” (Id. at 2). In response to

20

question 5, plaintiff asserts that her car was totaled, but the remainder of her response is illegible.

21

(Id.). Plaintiff does not list her monthly expenses in response to question 6 and does not list the

22

amounts of her debts in response to question 8. (Id.). Plaintiff has not fully answered the

23

questions asked. The Court thus denies her application without prejudice.

24

The Court also denies Plaintiff’s motion for appointment of counsel. Courts have

25

authority to request that an attorney represent any person unable to afford counsel. 28 U.S.C.

26

§ 1915(e)(1). Whether to appoint counsel is within the discretion of the district court and requires

27

a showing of exceptional circumstances. Agyeman v. Corrections Corp. of America, 390 F.3d

28

1101, 1103 (9th Cir. 2004). To determine whether exceptional circumstances exist, courts

1

consider the likelihood that the plaintiff will succeed on the merits as well as the plaintiff’s ability

2

to articulate his claims “in light of the complexity of the legal issues involved.” Id. Neither

3

factor is dispositive, and both must be viewed together. Wilborn v. Escalderon, 789 F.2d 1328,

4

1331 (9th Cir. 1986).

5

Here, Plaintiff has not shown exceptional circumstances for the appointment of counsel.

6

It is not clear that Plaintiff’s complaint will succeed on the merits because it has not passed

7

screening. Additionally, Plaintiff’s only argument regarding the difficulty that she has had

8

pursuing this case is that she has no money and because she believes her case has merit. But

9

these issues are true of every indigent litigant seeking counsel. And Plaintiff’s case has not

10

proceeded to the screening stage for the Court to determine if she is able to articulate her claims.

11

The Court thus denies her motion for appointment of counsel.

12
13

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Plaintiff’s application to proceed in forma

14

pauperis (ECF No. 4) is denied. Plaintiff must file a renewed application on or before June 10,

15

2024. The Clerk of Court is kindly directed to send Plaintiff a copy of the short form non-inmate

16

application to proceed in forma pauperis

17
18

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff’s motion for appointment of counsel (ECF
No. 5) is denied.

19
20
21
22

DATED: May 10, 2024
DANIEL J. ALBREGTS
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

23
24
25
26
27
28
Page 2 of 2