From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Levi v. Cate

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Jul 24, 2012
No. 2:11-cv-3164 MCE CKD PS (E.D. Cal. Jul. 24, 2012)

Opinion

No. 2:11-cv-3164 MCE CKD PS

07-24-2012

FRED LEVI, Plaintiff, v. M. CATE, et al., Defendant.


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 persons 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.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff's motion for appointment of counsel (dkt. no. 17) is denied.

_________________

CAROLYN K. DELANEY

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE


Summaries of

Levi v. Cate

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Jul 24, 2012
No. 2:11-cv-3164 MCE CKD PS (E.D. Cal. Jul. 24, 2012)
Case details for

Levi v. Cate

Case Details

Full title:FRED LEVI, Plaintiff, v. M. CATE, et al., Defendant.

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

Date published: Jul 24, 2012

Citations

No. 2:11-cv-3164 MCE CKD PS (E.D. Cal. Jul. 24, 2012)