Shteynberg v. Goldberg

District Court, D. Nevada

Shteynberg v. Goldberg

Trial Court Opinion

1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 2 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 3 Rudolf Shteynberg, Case No. 2:19-cv-1824-APG-BMW

4 Plaintiff, v. ORDER DENYING PENDING

5 Von Goldberg, MOTIONS

6 Defendant. (ECF Nos. 7, 8) 7 8

9 Plaintiff Rudolf Shteynberg has filed a motion seeking to reopen this case and to be referred 10 to a pro bono or private attorney. ECF Nos. 7, 8. He offers no reason to reopen this case, so I will 11 deny that motion. 12 As for appointment of counsel, a litigant does not have a constitutional right to appointed 13 counsel for civil cases. See, e.g., Storseth v. Spellman,

654 F.2d 1349, 1353

(9th Cir. 1981). The 14 court lacks the authority to force counsel to undertake representation of a client in a civil case. See 15 Mallard v. U.S. Dist. Ct.,

490 U.S. 296, 310

(1989). Instead, the court has discretion to request 16 that an attorney represent an indigent civil litigant. See

28 U.S.C. § 1915

(e)(1); Agyeman v. Corrs. 17 Corp. of Am.,

390 F.3d 1101

, 1103 (9th Cir. 2004). The court will request counsel for indigent 18 civil litigants only in “exceptional circumstances.” Palmer v. Valdez,

560 F.3d 965, 970

(9th Cir. 19 2009). In determining whether “exceptional circumstances” exist, the court considers the 20 likelihood of success on the merits as well as the ability of the litigant to articulate his claims pro 21 se in light of the complexity of the issues involved.

Id.

“Neither of these considerations is 22 dispositive and instead must be viewed together.”

Id.

23 1 No showing has been made that these standards are satisfied in this case, so I decline to 2\|exercise my discretion to request counsel for Mr. Shteynberg. Mr. Shteynberg may find it useful contact the Legal Aid Center of Southern Nevada, which provides various support services for pro se litigants, including an “‘ask-a-lawyer” program. The Legal Aid Center can be contacted at (702) 386-1070, and its website is www.lacsn.org. 6 Accordingly, the plaintiff’ s motion to reopen this case (ECF No. 7) is denied. The plaintiff’ s motion to refer counsel (ECF No. 8) is denied without prejudice. 8 Dated: February 10, 2020. OiEArN 9 ANDREWP.GORDON UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23

Reference

Status
Unknown