From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Thomas v. Crapotta

United States District Court, E.D. California
Aug 24, 2006
No. CIV S-05-0956 DFL EFB P (E.D. Cal. Aug. 24, 2006)

Opinion

No. CIV S-05-0956 DFL EFB P.

August 24, 2006


ORDER


Plaintiff requests the court appoint counsel upon the grounds he is indigent, he is in poor health, he is uneducated and there are many defendants.

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). Upon a showing of exceptional circumstances, the court may request the voluntary assistance of counsel. 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).

Plaintiff alleges defendants opted to treat plaintiff's ocular tumor by removing his eye even though other less invasive treatments were available. The law is well-settled and plaintiff articulates his claim well in light of its complexity. Plaintiff has failed to demonstrate exceptional circumstances.

For these reasons, plaintiff's August 14, 2006, request for appointment of counsel is denied.

So ordered.


Summaries of

Thomas v. Crapotta

United States District Court, E.D. California
Aug 24, 2006
No. CIV S-05-0956 DFL EFB P (E.D. Cal. Aug. 24, 2006)
Case details for

Thomas v. Crapotta

Case Details

Full title:HOWARD P. THOMAS, Plaintiff, v. CHARLES F. CRAPOTTA, et al., Defendants

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

Date published: Aug 24, 2006

Citations

No. CIV S-05-0956 DFL EFB P (E.D. Cal. Aug. 24, 2006)