Moore v. King County Jail

Filing 13

ORDER denying 6 Motion to Appoint Counsel by Hon. Brian A Tsuchida. (cc: plaintiff)(ST)

1
2
3
4
5
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
AT SEATTLE

6
7
8

DAVID A. MOORE,
Plaintiff,

9
10
11
12

CASE NO. C17-347 JCC-BAT
ORDER DENYING MOTION TO
APPOINT COUNSEL

v.
KING COUNTY JAIL, et al.,
Defendant.

13
14
15
16

Defendant filed a pro se § 1983 complaint and moves the Court to appoint counsel. Dkt.
6. For reasons below, the Court DENIES the motion.
A person generally has no right to counsel in a civil action. See Campbell v. Burt, 141

17

F.3d 927, 931 (9th Cir. 1998). The Court may appoint counsel for indigent civil litigants under

18

28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1), but only under “exceptional circumstances.” Agyeman v. Corrections

19

Corp. of Am., 390 F.3d 1101, 1103 (9th Cir. 2004). When determining whether “exceptional

20

circumstances” exist, the Court considers “the likelihood of success on the merits as well as the

21

ability of the [plaintiff] to articulate his claims pro se in light of the complexity of the legal issues

22

involved.” Weygandt v. Look, 718 F.2d 952, 954 (9th Cir. 1983).

23

ORDER DENYING MOTION TO APPOINT COUNSEL - 1

1

Based on these factors, appointment of counsel is not justified at this point. The

2

complaint filed is deficient and must be cured to survive dismissal. Additionally, plaintiff has

3

shown via the pleadings he has submitted that he can articulate his claims pro se in light of the

4

complexity of the legal issues involved. The Court accordingly DENIES the motion. Dkt. 6.

5

The Clerk is directed to send a copy of this Order to plaintiff.

6

DATED this 17th day of April, 2017.

7
8
9

A
BRIAN A. TSUCHIDA
United States Magistrate Judge

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23

ORDER DENYING MOTION TO APPOINT COUNSEL - 2