Cowan

(PC) Warden v. Cowan

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaFebruary 5, 20202:19-cv-00431California344 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 MASA NATHANIAL WARDEN, No. 2:19-cv-00431-MCE-AC Plaintiff, v. ORDER B. COWAN, et al., Defendants. 16 The court is in receipt of plaintiff’s second motion to appoint counsel. ECF No. 36. Plaintiff is incarcerated, and is bringing his civil case as a self-represented litigant proceeding in forma pauperis. ECF No. 10. Plaintiff requests that the court appoint counsel, asserting his case is complex, and he needs extra time to answer discovery. ECF No. 36. Plaintiff indicates that defendants have served him with interrogatories, but does not indicate when his responses are due. Id. In civil cases, a pro se litigant’s right to counsel “is a privilege and not a right.” United States ex Rel. Gardner v. Madden, 352 F.2d 792, 793 (9th Cir. 1965) (citation omitted). “Appointment of counsel should be allowed only in exceptional cases.” Id. When determining whether “exceptional circumstances” exist, the court must…

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.