Howard Lee White v. American Tobacco Co.

992 F.2d 1220 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. Howard Lee WHITE, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. AMERICAN TOBACCO CO., Defendant-Appellee. No. 91-16911. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted April 16, 1993. * Decided April 28, 1993. Before SCHROEDER, PREGERSON and D.W. NELSON, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 Howard Lee White ("White") appeals pro se from the district court's grant of summary judgment in favor of defendant American Tobacco Company ("American Tobacco") in White's suit to recover for personal injuries caused by the defendant's tobacco. White alleges that the district court erred by: (1) denying White's requests for the appointment of counsel; (2) denying White's request for the appointment of an expert witness; (3) refusing to grant leave for White to file a Second Amended Complaint; and (4) granting summary judgment in favor of American Tobacco. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm. I. BACKGROUND 3…