Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_22-cv-01296/USCOURTS-caed-2_22-cv-01296-0/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 

MANUEL CARDOVA, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

D. HURTADO, et al., 

Defendants. 

No. 2:22-cv-1296 AC P 

ORDER 

 Plaintiff has requested the appointment of counsel. ECF No. 3. In support of the motion, 

plaintiff states in part that he has problems reading and that he is a mental health patient. Id. He 

also states that the issues in his case are very complicated and that he is unable to afford counsel. 

Id. 

 The United States Supreme Court has ruled that 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). In certain exceptional circumstances, the court may request the voluntary 

assistance of counsel pursuant to 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). 

 A cursory review of plaintiff’s complaint indicates that it is sufficiently legible; that 

plaintiff has stated with adequate clarity the nature of his claims and the relief sought, and that he 

has enough of an understanding of his case to have provided seemingly appropriate 

Case 2:22-cv-01296-TLN-AC Document 7 Filed 07/26/22 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 

documentation to support it. See ECF No. 1 at 4-5, 7 (claims raised and relief sought); ECF No. 1 

at 8-24 (supporting documentation). For these reasons, the court does not find the required 

exceptional circumstances at this time. Therefore, plaintiff’s request for the appointment of 

counsel will therefore be denied. 

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

counsel (ECF No. 3) is DENIED. 

DATED: July 26, 2022 

Case 2:22-cv-01296-TLN-AC Document 7 Filed 07/26/22 Page 2 of 2