Loterzstain

(PC) Newsome v. Loterzstain

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaAugust 8, 20192:19-cv-00307California1,964 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 SHELDON RAY NEWSOME, No. 2:19-cv-307-EFB P Plaintiff, v. ORDER AND FINDINGS AND

RECOMMENDATIONS

M. LOTERZSTAIN, et al., Defendants. 16 Plaintiff proceeds without counsel in this action brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. In addition to filing a complaint (ECF No. 1) and a first amended complaint (ECF No. 10), he has also filed a motion to appoint counsel (ECF No. 3), an application to proceed in forma pauperis (ECF No. 4), and a motion for injunctive relief (ECF No. 12). Motion to Appoint Counsel Plaintiff requests that the court appoint counsel to represent him because he is indigent. ECF No. 3. District courts lack authority to require counsel to represent indigent prisoners in section 1983 cases, however. Mallard v. United States Dist. Court, 490 U.S. 296, 298 (1989). In exceptional circumstances, the court may request an attorney to voluntarily to represent such a plaintiff. See 28…

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.