Tabor

(PC) Dao v. Tabor

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaMarch 5, 20242:22-cv-00846California399 words

Opinion

trial_court Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 CUONG HUY DAO, No. 2:22-cv-0846 KJN P 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER 14 P. TABOR, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff is a state prisoner, proceeding without counsel, with a civil rights action pursuant 18 to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. In the request for reconsideration filed February 20, 2024, plaintiff 19 requested appointment of counsel. (ECF No. 79.) On March 1, 2024, the Honorable Troy L. 20 Nunley referred plaintiff’s request for appointment of counsel to this court. (ECF No. 82.) 21 For the reasons stated herein, plaintiff’s request for appointment of counsel is denied. 22 District courts lack authority to require counsel to represent indigent prisoners in section 23 1983 cases. Mallard v. United States Dist. Court, 490 U.S. 296, 298 (1989). In exceptional 24 circumstances, the court may request an attorney to voluntarily represent such a plaintiff. See 28 25 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1). Terrell v. Brewer, 935 F.2d 1015, 1017 (9th Cir. 1991); Wood v. 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.