Heagy v. Kitsap County et al

Filing 13

ORDER denying 11 Motion to Appoint Counsel by Judge J Richard Creatura.(JLP)(copy mailed to plaintiff)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 This 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action has been referred to the undersigned Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 636(b)(1)(A) and 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Magistrates Judges' Rules MJR 1, MJR 3, and MJR 4. The matter is before the Court on plaintiff's motion for appointment of counsel (Dkt. # 11). There is no right to have counsel appointed in cases brought under 42 U.S.C. ' 1983. Although the court, under 28 U.S.C. ' 1915(e) (1), can request counsel to represent a party, the court may do so only in exceptional circumstances. Wilborn v. Escalderon, 789 F.2d 1328, 1331 (9th Cir. 1986); Franklin v. Murphy, 745 F.2d 1221, 1236 (9th Cir. 1984); Aldabe v. Aldabe, 616 F.2d 1089 (9th Cir. 1980). A finding of exceptional circumstances requires an evaluation of both v. KITSAP COUNTY et al., Defendants. ROBERT DEAN HEAGY, Plaintiff, CASE NO. C09-5091RBL/JRC ORDER DENYING APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT TACOMA

ORDER - 1

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26

the likelihood of success on the merits and the ability of the plaintiff to articulate his claims pro se in light of the complexity of the legal issues involved. Wilborn, 789 F.2d at 1331. Plaintiff has demonstrated an adequate ability to articulate his claims pro se (Dkt # 7). This case is not in a posture where the court can determine the likelihood of success on the merits. Plaintiff's Motion to Appoint Counsel (Dkt. # 11) is DENIED. The Clerk's Office is directed to send plaintiff a copy of this order and remove Dkt. # 11 from the Court's calendar. DATED this 20th day of April, 2009.

A
J. Richard Creatura United States Magistrate Judge

ORDER - 2