Opinion
3:23-cv-00074-MMD-CLB
07-13-2023
THOMAS BURDSAL, Plaintiff, v. SCOTT DAVIS, et al., Defendants.
ORDER
Plaintiff has filed two identical motions requesting that the Court allow another inmate, Willie R. Lewis, to assist him at the court-ordered mediation conference, or, in the alternative, appoint Plaintiff counsel for the remainder of the case. (ECF Nos. 9, 10 at 12.) In his motions, Plaintiff states that Lewis has been allowed to assist him during his case so far. (Id. at 1-2.)
A litigant does not have a constitutional right to appointed counsel in 42 U.S.C. § 1983 civil rights claims. Storseth v. Spellman, 654 F.2d 1349, 1353 (9th Cir. 1981). Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1), “[t]he court may request an attorney to represent any person unable to afford counsel.” However, the court will appoint counsel for indigent civil litigants only in “exceptional circumstances.” Palmer v. Valdez, 560 F.3d 965, 970 (9th Cir. 2009) (§ 1983 action). “When determining whether ‘exceptional circumstances' exist, a court must consider the likelihood of success on the merits as well as the ability of the petitioner to articulate his claims pro se in light of the complexity of the legal issues involved.” Id. “Neither of these considerations is dispositive and instead must be viewed together.” Id.
In the instant case, the Court grants in part and denies in part Plaintiff's motions. (ECF Nos. 9, 10.) First, the Court grants Plaintiff's request to have inmate Willie R. Lewis attend the court-ordered mediation conference as a helper, assuming, however, that the Office of the Attorney General of the State of Nevada or the Nevada Department of Corrections (“NDOC”) have no objections to this arrangement. If either of these entities has any safety or security concerns with Lewis assisting Plaintiff at the mediation conference, they must file a motion with the Court by July 21, 2023. Second, the Court does not find exceptional circumstances that warrant the appointment of counsel at this time. Like many prisoners filing civil rights actions in this Court, Plaintiff alleges that he has difficulty litigating his claims. Therefore, the Court does not find exceptional circumstances that warrant the appointment of counsel and denies Plaintiff's request for counsel without prejudice. (ECF Nos. 9, 10.)