From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Hardin v. Latimer

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Jan 26, 2012
No. CIV S-10-1133 EFB P (E.D. Cal. Jan. 26, 2012)

Opinion

No. CIV S-10-1133 EFB P

01-26-2012

KEVIN HOSEA HARDIN, Plaintiff, v. KAREN LATIMER, et al., Defendants.


ORDER

Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding without counsel in an action brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. He has requested that the court appoint counsel. District courts lack authority to require counsel to represent indigent prisoners in section 1983 cases. Mallard v. United States Dist. Court, 490 U.S. 296, 298 (1989). In exceptional circumstances, the court may request counsel voluntarily to represent such a plaintiff. 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). The court finds that there are no exceptional circumstances in this case.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff's January 9, 2012 motion for appointment of counsel is denied.

____________________________

EDMUND F. BRENNAN

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE


Summaries of

Hardin v. Latimer

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Jan 26, 2012
No. CIV S-10-1133 EFB P (E.D. Cal. Jan. 26, 2012)
Case details for

Hardin v. Latimer

Case Details

Full title:KEVIN HOSEA HARDIN, Plaintiff, v. KAREN LATIMER, et al., Defendants.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Date published: Jan 26, 2012

Citations

No. CIV S-10-1133 EFB P (E.D. Cal. Jan. 26, 2012)