From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

King v. Runnels

United States District Court, E.D. California
Feb 25, 2010
No. CIV S-06-0065 LKK GGH P (E.D. Cal. Feb. 25, 2010)

Opinion

No. CIV S-06-0065 LKK GGH P.

February 25, 2010


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 request for the appointment of counsel is denied. This order is without prejudice to plaintiff seeking counsel for purposes of the certified interlocutory appeal, if the Ninth Circuit determine to hear such appeal.


Summaries of

King v. Runnels

United States District Court, E.D. California
Feb 25, 2010
No. CIV S-06-0065 LKK GGH P (E.D. Cal. Feb. 25, 2010)
Case details for

King v. Runnels

Case Details

Full title:KEVIN EUGENE KING, Plaintiff, v. D.L. RUNNELS, et al., Defendants

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

Date published: Feb 25, 2010

Citations

No. CIV S-06-0065 LKK GGH P (E.D. Cal. Feb. 25, 2010)