From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Payne v. Brimhall

United States District Court, E.D. California
May 8, 2007
No. CIV S-04-1585 MCE KJM P (E.D. Cal. May. 8, 2007)

Opinion

No. CIV S-04-1585 MCE KJM P.

May 8, 2007


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.

In addition, plaintiff has filed his second request for an extension of time to file and serve an opposition to the defendants' January 26, 2007 motion to dismiss. Good cause appearing, the request will be granted.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Plaintiff's April 25, 2007 motion for the appointment of counsel is denied;

2. Plaintiff's April 25, 2007 request for an extension of time is granted; and

3. Plaintiff is granted thirty days from the date of this order in which to file and serve an opposition to defendants' January 26, 2007 motion to dismiss.


Summaries of

Payne v. Brimhall

United States District Court, E.D. California
May 8, 2007
No. CIV S-04-1585 MCE KJM P (E.D. Cal. May. 8, 2007)
Case details for

Payne v. Brimhall

Case Details

Full title:MARK L. PAYNE, Plaintiff, v. TROY BRIMHALL, et al., Defendants

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

Date published: May 8, 2007

Citations

No. CIV S-04-1585 MCE KJM P (E.D. Cal. May. 8, 2007)