Moore v. Snohomish County et al

Filing 10

ORDER denying plaintiff's 9 Motion to Appoint Counsel. Signed by Hon. Brian A Tsuchida. (PM) cc: plaintiff via first class mail

1
2
3
4
5
6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
AT SEATTLE

7
8 RYAN P. MOORE,

Plaintiff,

9
10

Case No. 18-570 RSM-BAT
ORDER DENYING MOTION TO
APPOINT COUNSEL

v.

11 GIBSON, et al.,
12

Defendants.

13
Plaintiff filed a pro se and in forma pauperis civil rights action. He now moves for
14
appointment of counsel. Dkt. 9. A person generally has no right to counsel in a civil action. See
15
Campbell v. Burt, 141 F.3d 927, 931 (9th Cir. 1998). The Court may appoint counsel for indigent
16
civil litigants under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1), but only under “exceptional circumstances.”
17
Agyeman v. Corrections Corp. of Am., 390 F.3d 1101, 1103 (9th Cir. 2004). When determining
18
whether “exceptional circumstances” exist, the Court considers “the likelihood of success on the
19
merits as well as the ability of the [plaintiff] to articulate his claims pro se in light of the
20
complexity of the legal issues involved.” Weygandt v. Look, 718 F.2d 952, 954 (9th Cir. 1983).
21
Plaintiff requests appointment of counsel on the grounds no lawyer that he has contacted
22
has been willing to represent him. This is not an extraordinary circumstance warranting the
23
appointment of counsel at this point and the Court accordingly DENIES the motion, Dkt. 9,
ORDER DENYING MOTION TO APPOINT COUNSEL - 1

1 without prejudice. The Clerk shall provide a copy of this Order to plaintiff.
2

DATED this 6th day of June, 2018.

3

A

4

BRIAN A. TSUCHIDA
United States Magistrate Judge

5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23

ORDER DENYING MOTION TO APPOINT COUNSEL - 2