Hernandez
Hernandez v. Williams
Opinion
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 LINO HERNANDEZ, Case No.: 21-cv-944-WQH-KSC
Plaintiff,
ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S
v. SECOND MOTION TO APPOINT
COUNSEL
DR. NATHAN WILLIAMS; DR. NASIR;
DR. STEPKE; and DR. ERIKA ESTOCK, [Doc. No. 30] Defendants. 16 17 18 Plaintiff Lino Hernandez (“plaintiff”) is proceeding pro se in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging defendants violated his rights under the United States Constitution. See Doc. Nos. 1, 29. Before the Court is plaintiff’s Motion for Appointment of Counsel (the “Motion” or “Mot.”). Doc. No. 30. This is plaintiff’s second request to have counsel appointed for him at taxpayer expense. See Doc. No. 12. For the reasons stated below, the plaintiff’s Motion is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. I. BACKGROUND On May 17, 2021, plaintiff filed the instant Action, alleging that defendants violated his rights…