Opinion
2:23-cv-01207-RSL
10-19-2023
JUSTIN BAKER, Plaintiff, v. AVENUE5 RESIDENTIAL, Defendant.
ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL
BRIAN A. TSUCHIDA, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Plaintiff's motion for appointment of counsel, Dkt. 6, has been referred to the undersigned Magistrate Judge. Dkt. 14
There is no right to counsel in civil actions. See Campbell v. Burt, 141 F.3d 927, 931 (9th Cir. 1998). A court may appoint counsel for indigent civil litigants under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1), but only if there are “exceptional circumstances.” Agyeman v. Corrections Corp. of Am., 390 F.3d 1101, 1103 (9th Cir. 2004). To determine if “exceptional circumstances” exist, the Court considers “the likelihood of success on the merits as well as the ability of the [plaintiff] to articulate his claims pro se in light of the complexity of the legal issues involved.” Weygandt v. Look, 718 F.2d 952, 954 (9th Cir. 1983).
Plaintiff has not shown there are extraordinary circumstances that warrant appointment of counsel. Plaintiff's claims revolve around allegations against the owner of the building in which he currently resides. Plaintiff sued the prior owner of this building alleging various violations of federal law. See Baker v. Thrive Communities, 22-872-LK. He now sues the current owner of the building again raising various violations of federal law. Plaintiff's past case and the present case demonstrate he has the ability to sufficiently articulate his claims and to present his case. Plaintiff voluntarily dismissed the earlier suit he brought against Thrive, after Defendants filed a motion to dismiss, and there is presently insufficient information to conclude Plaintiff's present claims have a strong likelihood of success. The Court accordingly Orders:
(1) Plaintiff's motion for appointment of counsel, Dkt. 6, is Denied.
(2) The Clerk shall provide the parties with a copy of this Order.