Kelso

(PC) McCoy v. Kelso

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaMay 1, 20201:12-cv-00983California1,119 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JOSEPH RAYMOND MCCOY, ) Case No.: 1:12-cv-000983-AWI-SAB (PC) ) Plaintiff, ) ) ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION v. ) FOR RECONSIDERATION OF THE COURT’S

MARCH 2, 2020 ORDER DENYING REQUEST

STRONACH, et al., ) FOR APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL ) Defendants. ) (Doc. No. 212) ) )

Plaintiff Joseph Raymond McCoy is appearing pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Currently before the Court is Plaintiff’s “objections” to the Court’s February 19, 2020 order denying his sixth request for appointment of counsel, filed March 2, 2020. (Doc. No. 212.) The Court construes Plaintiff’s objections as a motion for reconsideration. Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b) governs relief from orders of the district court. The Rule permits a district court to relieve a party from a final order or judgment on grounds of: “(1) mistake, inadvertence,…

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.