Vierra

(PC) Morrison v. Vierra

Bad Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaJanuary 5, 20212:20-cv-01924California257 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 CURTIS LEE MORRISON, No. 2:20-cv-1924 DB P Plaintiff, v. ORDER E. VIERRA, Defendant. 16 Plaintiff has requested the appointment of counsel. (ECF No. 3). In support of the motion, plaintiff states that he is not a lawyer and that ultimately, he needs one to help him properly present his job discrimination claims to the court. (See id. at 2). The United States Supreme Court has ruled that district courts lack authority to require counsel to represent indigent prisoners in § 1983 cases. Mallard v. United States Dist. Court, 490 U.S. 296, 298 (1989). In certain exceptional circumstances, the court may request the voluntary assistance of counsel pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1). Terrell v. Brewer, 935 F.2d 1015, 1017 (9th Cir. 1991); Wood v. Housewright, 900 F.2d 1332, 1335-36 (9th Cir. 1990). In the present case, the court does not find the required exceptional circumstances. Plaintiff’s request for the 26 …

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.