Quick

(PC) Jackson v. Quick

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaOctober 20, 20201:19-cv-01591California523 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10 11 CORNEL JACKSON, Case No. 1:19-cv-01591-NONE-EPG (PC) 12 Plaintiff, ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL, v. WITHOUT PREJUDICE 14 JASON QUICK, et al., (ECF NO. 28)

Defendants.

17 Cornel Jackson (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se in this civil rights action filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On October 16, 2020, Plaintiff filed a motion for appointment of pro bono counsel. (ECF No. 28). Plaintiff asks for appointment of counsel because he is unable to afford counsel; because his incarceration has greatly limited his ability to litigate; because the issues involved in this case are complex and will require significant research and investigation; because Plaintiff has no access to a law library; because Defendants refuse to provide legal information or materials; and Plaintiff has no knowledge of the law; and Plaintiff has limited formal education and reading disabilities. Plaintiff also states that a trial…

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.