United States District Court for the Eastern District of California, 2023

(PC) Bullock v. Dowbak

(PC) Bullock v. Dowbak
United States District Court for the Eastern District of California · Decided September 28, 2023
(PC) Bullock v. Dowbak

Trial Court Opinion

8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA RICHARD LEE BULLOCK, No. 2:23-cv-1634 TLN CKD P 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER JOHN M. DOWBACK, et al., 15 Defendants.

17 Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se in an action brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.

18 Plaintiff requests that the court appoint counsel. District courts lack authority to require counsel to represent indigent prisoners in section 1983 cases. Mallard v. United States Dist. Court, 490 20 U.S. 296, 298 (1989). In exceptional circumstances, the court may request an attorney to voluntarily represent such a plaintiff. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1). Terrell v. Brewer, 935 F.2d 22 1015, 1017 (9th Cir. 1991); Wood v. Housewright, 900 F.2d 1332, 1335-36 (9th Cir. 1990).

23 When determining whether “exceptional circumstances” exist, the court must consider plaintiff’s likelihood of success on the merits as well as the ability of the plaintiff to articulate his claims pro se in light of the complexity of the legal issues involved. Palmer v. Valdez, 560 F.3d 965, 970 (9th Cir. 2009) (district court did not abuse discretion in declining to appoint counsel). The burden of demonstrating exceptional circumstances is on the plaintiff. Id. Circumstances ///// | common to most prisoners, such as lack of legal education and limited law library access, do not || establish exceptional circumstances that warrant a request for voluntary assistance of counsel.

3 Having considered the factors under Palmer, the court finds that plaintiff has failed to | meet his burden of demonstrating exceptional circumstances warranting the appointment of || counsel at this time.

6 Plaintiff also requests an extension of time to file an amended complaint. Good cause || appearing, that request will be granted.

8 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 9 1. Plaintiffs motion for the appointment of counsel (ECF No. 10) is denied.

10 2. Plaintiffs request for an extension of time to file an amended complaint is granted.

11 | Plaintiffis granted 30 days within which to file his amended complaint. Failure to comply with || this order will result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed.

13 | Dated: September 28, 2023 / ae □□ / a Ly a 4 CAROLYN K DELANEY 15 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE | 1 19 bulll634.ext

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.