Brown v. Schnoor et al

Filing 22

ORDER denying 19 Motion to Appoint Counsel signed by Judge J Richard Creatura.(MET) cc: plaintiff

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
AT TACOMA

8
9
10

KEVIN A BROWN,

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20

Plaintiff,
v.
MARK SCHNOOR et al.,

CASE NO. C14-5099 RJB-JRC
ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S
MOTION FOR APPOINTMENT OF
COUNSEL

Defendant.
The District Court has referred this 42 U.S.C. §1983 civil rights action to Magistrate
Judge J. Richard Creatura. The Court’s authority for the referral is 28 U.S.C. §§ 636(b)(1)(A)
and (B) and Local Magistrate Judge Rules MJR 1, MJR 3, and MJR 4.
Plaintiff asks the Court to appoint counsel to represent him in this matter (Dkt. 19). There
is no right to have counsel appointed in cases brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Although the
Court can request counsel to represent a party, 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1), the Court may do so only in

21 exceptional circumstances. Wilborn v. Escalderon, 789 F.2d 1328, 1331 (9th Cir. 1986); Franklin v.
22 Murphy, 745 F.2d 1221, 1236 (9th Cir. 1984); Aldabe v. Aldabe, 616 F.2d 1089 (9th Cir. 1980). A
23 finding of exceptional circumstances requires the Court to evaluate both the likelihood of success on
24
ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR
APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL - 1

1 the merits and the ability of plaintiff to articulate his claims pro se in light of the complexity of the
2 legal issues involved. Wilborn, 789 F.2d at 1331.
3

Plaintiff has articulated a viable retaliation claim against several persons. However,

4 discovery is just beginning and plaintiff has not shown a likelihood of success on the merits.
5 Plaintiff has articulated his claims quite well and in response to counsel’s argument that he does not
6 show a likelihood of success on the merits, plaintiff cites Fed. R. Civ. P. 12 (b) and argues that there
7
8
9
10

is a mechanism in place to test the sufficiency of a complaint. Thus, as defendants note, plaintiff is
able to “indentify relevant court rules and make arguments based on them.” (Dkt. 20, p. 2). Plaintiff
has failed to show that exceptional circumstances warrant appointment of counsel in this case. The
Court denies his motion for appointment of counsel.

Dated this 4th day of September, 2014.
11
12

A

13

J. Richard Creatura
United States Magistrate Judge

14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR
APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL - 2