(PC) Scott v. California Health Care Facility

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaSeptember 4, 20192:18-cv-00635California438 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 HOWARD SCOTT, No. 2:18-cv-0635 TLN CKD P Plaintiff, v. ORDER CALIFORNIA HEALTH CARE

FACILITY,

14 Defendant. 15 Plaintiff is a California prisoner proceeding pro se. On August 29, 2018, this action was stayed so that plaintiff could locate certain documents and retain counsel. Plaintiff now asks that the court appoint counsel. District courts lack authority to require counsel to represent indigent prisoners in section 1983 cases. Mallard v. United States Dist. Court, 490 U.S. 296, 298 (1989). In exceptional circumstances, the court may request an attorney to voluntarily represent such a plaintiff. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1). Terrell v. Brewer, 935 F.2d 1015, 1017 (9th Cir. 1991); Wood v. Housewright, 900 F.2d 1332, 1335-36 (9th Cir. 1990). When determining whether “exceptional circumstances” exist, the court must consider plaintiff’s likelihood of success on the merits as well as the ability of the plaintiff to articulate his claims…

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.