Cowan

(PC) Warden v. Cowan

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaAugust 18, 20202:19-cv-00431California462 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 third motion to appoint counsel. ECF No. 46. Plaintiff filed this motion on the date that his opposition brief to defendants’ motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 43) was due. Plaintiff did not file an opposition brief. 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 he does not currently have access to the law library and does not have adequate access to evidence due to his incarceration. ECF No. 46 at 2. 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…

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.