McCabe

(PC) Ritter v. McCabe

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaDecember 20, 20211:19-cv-00324California738 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 RONALD RITTER, Case No. 1:19-cv-00324-DAD-HBK Plaintiff, ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION

TO APPOINT COUNSEL AND DIRECTING

v. CLERK TO UPDATE PLAINTIFF’S

ADDRESS OF RECORD

CONALL MCCABE, ET. AL., (Doc. No. 38) Defendants. 16 Pending before the Court is Plaintiff’s motion to appoint counsel, filed December 2, 2021. (Doc. No. 38). Plaintiff initiated this action by filing a pro se prisoner civil rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 on March 11, 2019. (Doc. No. 1). Plaintiff is proceeding on his first amended complaint. (Doc. No. 10). The United States Constitution does not require appointment of counsel in civil cases. See Lewis v. Casey, 518 U.S. 343, 354 (1996) (explaining Bounds v. Smith, 430 U.S. at 817, did not create a right to appointment of counsel in civil cases). Under 28 U.S.C. § 1915, this court has discretionary authority to appoint counsel for an indigent to commence, prosecute, or defend…

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.