CDCR

(PC) Gleason v. CDCR

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaMarch 6, 20242:20-cv-00775California298 words

Opinion

trial_court Opinion

2 3 4 5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 10 THOMAS LEE GLEASON, JR., No. 2:20-cv-00775-KJM-CKD 11 Plaintiff,

ORDER

12 v. 13 J. ROMARY, ET AL., 14 Defendants. 15 16 Plaintiff is a former state prisoner who, proceeding pro se, filed this civil rights action 17 under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The court found appointment of counsel for plaintiff was warranted for 18 the limited purpose of representing plaintiff at a settlement conference. The court selected Calvin 19 J. Massey from the Court’s Pro Bono Attorney Panel to represent plaintiff for this limited 20 purpose. See ECF No. 85. The case did not settle. See Mins., ECF No. 90. The court finds 21 exceptional circumstances exist to warrant the appointment of counsel during the pendency of the 22 remaining proceedings in this court. See Palmer v. Valdez, 560 F.3d 965, 970 (9th Cir. 2009). 23 Attorney Massey has agreed to continue representation of plaintiff in this case. 24 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 25 1. The appointment of Calvin J. Massey as pro bono counsel for…

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.