King

(PC) Dalke v. King

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaAugust 11, 20211:20-cv-00534California703 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JOSHUA JASON DALKE, ) Case No.: 1:20-cv-00534-AWI-SAB (PC) ) Plaintiff, ) ) ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S THIRD v. ) MOTION FOR APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL,

WITHOUT PREJUDICE

KING CLARK, et al., ) ) (ECF No. 123) Defendants. ) ) )

Plaintiff Joshua Jason Dalke 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 third motion for appointment of counsel, filed August 9, 2021. As Plaintiff is aware, he 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 may…

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.