Torres

(PC) Holland v. Torres

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaMay 8, 20251:24-cv-00557California599 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 THADIUS J. HOLLAND, Case No. 1:24-cv-00557-JLT-BAM (PC) Plaintiff, ORDER DENYING MOTION TO APPOINT

COUNSEL

v. (ECF No. 28) TORRES, et al., Defendants. 12 Plaintiff Thadius J. Holland (“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 against Defendants Guadalupe Torres and Candice Gish (“Defendants”) for deliberate indifference to medical care in violation of the Eighth Amendment. Currently before the Court is Plaintiff’s motion for appointment of counsel, filed May 5, 2025. (ECF No. 28.) Plaintiff states that he is indigent, and his facility has been on an ongoing lockdown status for the past 30 days. During this period, Plaintiff does not have access to the law library or a GTL tablet to research his case. Plaintiff also argues that his case presents exceptional circumstances due to the complexity of the legal and factual issues involved, 22 …

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.