(PC) Scott v. California Health Care Facility
Opinion
trial_court Opinion
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 10 HOWARD SCOTT, No. 2:18-cv-0635 TLN CKD P 11 Plaintiff, 12 v. ORDER 13 CALIFORNIA HEALTH CARE FACILITY, et al., 14 Defendants. 15 16 Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se in an action brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. 17 Plaintiff requests that the court appoint counsel. District courts lack authority to require counsel 18 to represent indigent prisoners in section 1983 cases. Mallard v. United States Dist. Court, 490 19 U.S. 296, 298 (1989). In exceptional circumstances, the court may request an attorney to 20 voluntarily represent such a plaintiff. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1). Terrell v. Brewer, 935 F.2d 21 1015, 1017 (9th Cir. 1991); Wood v. Housewright, 900 F.2d 1332, 1335-36 (9th Cir. 1990). 22 When determining whether “exceptional circumstances” exist, the court must consider plaintiff’s 23 likelihood of success on the merits as well as the ability of the plaintiff to articulate his claims pro 24 se in light of the complexity of the legal issues involved. …