Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_11-cv-02564/USCOURTS-caed-2_11-cv-02564-11/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 550
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Civil Rights (U.S. defendant)
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Prisoner Civil Rights

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

GARY LASHER,

Plaintiff,

v.

R. MIRANDA, et al.,

Defendants.

No. 2: 11-cv-2564 WBS KJN P

ORDER

Plaintiff is a state prisoner, proceeding without counsel, in an action brought under 42 

U.S.C. § 1983. On August 2, 2013, the court granted in part and denied in part defendants’ 

summary judgment motion. By separate order, this action will be scheduled for trial.

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 U.S. 296, 298 (1989). In exceptional circumstances, the court may request an attorney 

to voluntarily to represent such a plaintiff. See 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). 

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 

Case 2:11-cv-02564-JAM-KJN Document 67 Filed 08/09/13 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

2

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. 

The issue left for trial is whether the alleged delay in plaintiff’s shoulder surgery caused 

plaintiff to suffer pain and suffering. This issue is not particularly complicated. Plaintiff has 

represented himself competently in this action. Accordingly, 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.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff’s motion for the appointment of 

counsel is (ECF No. 63) denied without prejudice.

Dated: August 9, 2013

lash2564.31

Case 2:11-cv-02564-JAM-KJN Document 67 Filed 08/09/13 Page 2 of 2