Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_10-cv-02206/USCOURTS-azd-2_10-cv-02206-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 555
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Prison Condition
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

WO

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Geary W. Walton,

Plaintiff, 

vs.

Charles L. Ryan,

Defendant. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CV-10-2206-PHX-FJM (LOA)

ORDER

This matter arises on Plaintiff’s Motion for Appointment of Counsel. (Doc. 28)

For the reasons set forth below, the Court will deny the motion to appoint counsel. 

APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL

In a civil case, there is no constitutional right to appointment of counsel.

Johnson v. U.S. Department of Treasury, 939 F.2d 820, 824 (9th Cir. 1991). However,

“[t]he court may request an attorney to represent any person unable to afford counsel.” 28

U.S.C. § 1915(d). The statute gives the trial court broad discretion to determine whether

appointment of counsel is warranted, but the Ninth Circuit has limited the exercise of that

power to exceptional circumstances. Aldabe v. Aldabe, 616 F.2d 1089, 1093 (9th Cir. 1980);

United States ex rel. Gardner v. Madden, 352 F.2d 792 (9th Cir. 1965). Other circuits agree.

See e.g., Lovado v. Keohane, 992 F.2d 601, 605-05 (6th Cir. 1993); Fowler v. Jones, 899

F.2d 1088, 1096 (11th Cir. 1990); Cookish v. Cunningham, 787 F.2d 1, 2 (1st Cir. 1986);

Cook v.Bounds, 518 F.2d 779, 780 (4th Cir. 1975). 

Case 2:10-cv-02206-FJM Document 36 Filed 08/15/11 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 -

In determining whether to appoint counsel, the district court should consider

the likelihood of success on the claim’s merits and the ability of plaintiff to articulate his

claims in view of their complexity. Wood v. Housewright, 900 F.2d 1332, 1335 (9th Cir.

1990). Other factors include: (1) Plaintiff’s education, literacy, prior work experience, and

prior litigation experience; (2) whether Plaintiff is a prisoner and whether any restraints are

placed on the prisoner to present her case; (3) the complexity of the underlying legal issues;

(4) whether the case entails a need for factual investigation; (5) Plaintiff’s ability to carry out

such investigation; (6) the likelihood that a claim will involve substantial discovery and

compliance with complex discovery rules; and (7) whether credibility determinations are

involved that may require the experience of one trained in the presentation of evidence and

cross-examination. Tabron v. Grace, 6 F.3d 147 (3rd Cir. 1993). However, the court must

temper these considerations with the practical restraints imposed by the small number of

attorneys willing to represent indigent parties without compensation and the court’s inability

to require counsel to undertake such representation. Id. at 157. 

After considering all the relevant factors - including that Plaintiff’s ability to

express himself in writing, the uncomplicated nature of the claims, and the fact that it is too

early in the litigation for the Court to determine the likelihood of success on the merits - the

Court concludes that exceptional circumstances are not present and appointment of counsel

is not warranted.

 Accordingly,

 IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Motion for Appointment of Counsel, doc. 28,

is DENIED without prejudice. 

DATED this 15th day of August, 2011.

Case 2:10-cv-02206-FJM Document 36 Filed 08/15/11 Page 2 of 2