Rudd

(PC) Mackey v. Rudd

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaJanuary 6, 20251:24-cv-00648California695 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 TERRY MACKEY, Case No. 1:24-cv-00648-JLT-BAM (PC) Plaintiff, ORDER DENYING MOTION TO APPOINT

COUNSEL

v. (ECF No. 20) RUDD, et al., Defendants. 16 Plaintiff Terry Mackey (“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: (1) Defendants Rudd and Ram for excessive force in violation of the Eighth Amendment; (2) Defendant Mix for failure to prevent harm in violation of the Eighth Amendment; (3) Defendants Rudd and Ram for a state law claim for battery; and (4) Defendants Rudd, Ram, and Mix for a state law claim for negligence. Currently before the Court is Plaintiff’s motion for appointment of counsel, filed January 2, 2025. (ECF No. 20.) Plaintiff states that he is unable to afford counsel, and the claims are complex because they are based on allegations of excessive use of force resulting…

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.