From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Duncan v. Kernan

United States District Court, E.D. California
Mar 26, 2009
No. 2:05-cv-2613 FCD JFM (PC) (E.D. Cal. Mar. 26, 2009)

Opinion

No. 2:05-cv-2613 FCD JFM (PC).

March 26, 2009


ORDER


Plaintiff has requested the appointment of counsel. The United States Supreme Court has ruled that district courts lack authority to require counsel to represent indigent prisoners in § 1983 cases. Mallard v. United States Dist. Court, 490 U.S. 296, 298 (1989). In certain exceptional circumstances, the court may request the voluntary assistance of counsel pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1). Terrell v. Brewer, 935 F.2d 1015, 1017 (9th Cir. 1991); Wood v. Housewright, 900 F.2d 1332, 1335-36 (9th Cir. 1990). In the present case, the court does not find the required exceptional circumstances. Plaintiff's request for the appointment of counsel will therefore be denied.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff's motion for the appointment of counsel (#59) is denied.


Summaries of

Duncan v. Kernan

United States District Court, E.D. California
Mar 26, 2009
No. 2:05-cv-2613 FCD JFM (PC) (E.D. Cal. Mar. 26, 2009)
Case details for

Duncan v. Kernan

Case Details

Full title:TIMOTHY DUNCAN, Plaintiff, v. SCOTT KERNAN, et al., Defendants

Court:United States District Court, E.D. California

Date published: Mar 26, 2009

Citations

No. 2:05-cv-2613 FCD JFM (PC) (E.D. Cal. Mar. 26, 2009)