Thomas

Thomas v. Pashilk

Good Law
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaDecember 20, 20223:22-cv-01778California430 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 HILBERT THOMAS, Case No. 22-cv-01778-JSC

Plaintiff,

ORDER DENYING APPOINTMENT

v. OF COUNSEL

R. PASHILK, et al., Re: Dkt. No. 50 Defendants.

12 Plaintiff has filed a motion for appointment of a lawyer to represent him in this civil rights case. There is no right to counsel in a civil case such as this. See Lassiter v. Dep't of Social Services, 452 U.S. 18, 25 (1981). The decision to request counsel to represent an indigent litigant under § 1915 is within “the sound discretion of the trial court and is granted only in exceptional circumstances.” Franklin v. Murphy, 745 F.2d 1221, 1236 (9th Cir. 1984). Plaintiff asserts that there are exceptional circumstances because the law librarian has a “discouraging influence” on him obtaining legal materials. (ECF No. 50 at 3.) These allegations are conclusory insofar as Plaintiff has not alleged how the librarian has discouraged him or what legal materials (if any) he has…

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.