(PC) DeOllas v. County of Sacramento

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaOctober 30, 20232:22-cv-00906California397 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 ANTHONY EUGENE DeOLLAS II, No. 2:22-cv-0906 DB P Plaintiff, v. ORDER COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO, et al., Defendants. 16 Plaintiff has requested a third extension of time to file the second amended complaint pursuant to the court’s order of August 1, 2023. Plaintiff has also requested appointment of counsel. 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 district 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). The test for exceptional circumstances requires the court to evaluate the plaintiff’s likelihood of success on the merits and the ability of the plaintiff to…

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.