John

(PC) Rysedorph v. John

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaJuly 2, 20241:23-cv-00251California765 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 JARED KRISTOPHER RYSEDORPH, Case No. 1:23-cv-00251-KES-BAM (PC) Plaintiff, ORDER DENYING MOTION TO APPOINT

COUNSEL

v. (ECF No. 44) JOHN, et al., Defendants. 16 Plaintiff Jared Kristopher Rysedorph (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This action proceeds on Plaintiff’s second amended complaint against Defendants Le and Banerjee for deliberate indifference to medical care in violation of the Eighth Amendment. Currently before the Court is Plaintiff’s motion to appoint counsel, filed July 1, 2024. (ECF No. 44.) Plaintiff states that there are multiple exceptional circumstances present in this case that preclude Plaintiff from adequately presenting, litigating, and ultimately pursuing his goal of settling this case without the assistance of legal counsel. As there are many claims that Defendants deny, extensive documentary discovery, depositions of prison…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.