From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

LEES v. FELKER

United States District Court, E.D. California
Nov 1, 2010
No. CIV S-08-0196 KJM P (E.D. Cal. Nov. 1, 2010)

Opinion

No. CIV S-08-0196 KJM P.

November 1, 2010


ORDER


Plaintiff has requested the appointment of counsel to assist him telephonically during the upcoming settlement conference. 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, noting that plaintiff has represented himself ably to date, the court does not find the required exceptional circumstances. Plaintiff's motion for the appointment of counsel will therefore be denied.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff's motion for the appointment of counsel (Docket No. 100) is denied.

DATED: October 1, 2010.


Summaries of

LEES v. FELKER

United States District Court, E.D. California
Nov 1, 2010
No. CIV S-08-0196 KJM P (E.D. Cal. Nov. 1, 2010)
Case details for

LEES v. FELKER

Case Details

Full title:ALEXANDER LEES, Plaintiff, v. T. FELKER, et al., Defendants

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

Date published: Nov 1, 2010

Citations

No. CIV S-08-0196 KJM P (E.D. Cal. Nov. 1, 2010)