From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Oliver v. Shelton

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Aug 7, 2018
No. 2:18-CV-1809-KJM-CMK (E.D. Cal. Aug. 7, 2018)

Opinion

No. 2:18-CV-1809-KJM-CMK

08-07-2018

DARON MICHAEL OLIVER, Plaintiff, v. DUANE SHELTON, et al., Defendants.


ORDER

Plaintiff, who is proceeding pro se, brings this civil action. Pending before the court is plaintiff's motion for appointment of counsel (Doc. 10).

The United States Supreme Court has ruled that district courts lack authority to require counsel to represent indigent plaintiffs in civil actions. See e.g. 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). See 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 at this time find the required exceptional circumstances. / / /

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff's request for the appointment of counsel (Doc. 10) is denied. DATED: August 7, 2018

/s/_________

CRAIG M. KELLISON

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE


Summaries of

Oliver v. Shelton

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Aug 7, 2018
No. 2:18-CV-1809-KJM-CMK (E.D. Cal. Aug. 7, 2018)
Case details for

Oliver v. Shelton

Case Details

Full title:DARON MICHAEL OLIVER, Plaintiff, v. DUANE SHELTON, et al., Defendants.

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

Date published: Aug 7, 2018

Citations

No. 2:18-CV-1809-KJM-CMK (E.D. Cal. Aug. 7, 2018)