Gomez
(PC) McElroy v. Gomez
Opinion
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
LATWAHN MCELROY, ) Case No.: 1:20-cv-00658-SAB (PC) ) Plaintiff, ) ) ORDER DENYING, WITHOUT PREJUDICE, v. ) PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR APPOINTMENT OF
COUNSEL
GOMEZ, et al., ) ) [ECF No. 9] Defendants. ) ) ) ) )
Plaintiff Latwahn McElroy is proceeding 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 motion for appointment of counsel, filed on June 11, 2020. Plaintiff does not have a constitutional right to appointed counsel in this action, Rand v. Rowland, 113 F.3d 1520, 1525 (9th Cir. 1997), and the court cannot require any attorney to represent plaintiff pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1). Mallard v. United States District Court for the Southern District of Iowa, 490 U.S. 296, 298 (1989). However, in certain exceptional circumstances the court 26 …