Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_14-cv-05058/USCOURTS-cand-4_14-cv-05058-2/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

United States District Court

Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

LA'KEITH DESHAWN WELLS,

Plaintiff,

v.

W. G. BAPTISTA,

Defendant.

Case No. 14-cv-05058-YGR (PR) 

ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR 

APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL

Plaintiff has filed a motion for appointment of counsel in this prisoner civil rights action 

under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. There is no constitutional right to counsel in a civil case unless an 

indigent litigant may lose his physical liberty if he loses the litigation. See Lassiter v. Dep’t of 

Soc. Servs., 452 U.S. 18, 25 (1981). The court may seek counsel to represent an indigent litigant 

under 28 U.S.C. § 1915 only in “exceptional circumstances,” the determination of which requires 

an evaluation of both (1) the likelihood of success on the merits, and (2) the ability of the plaintiff 

to articulate his claims pro se in light of the complexity of the legal issues involved. See id. at 

1525; Terrell v. Brewer, 935 F.2d 1015, 1017 (9th Cir. 1991); Wilborn v. Escalderon, 789 F.2d 

1328, 1331 (9th Cir. 1986). Both of these factors must be viewed together before reaching a 

decision on a request for counsel under section 1915. See id.

The Court is unable to assess at this time whether exceptional circumstances exist which 

would warrant seeking volunteer counsel to accept a pro bono appointment. The proceedings are 

at an early stage and it is premature for the Court to determine Plaintiff’s likelihood of success on 

the merits. Moreover, Plaintiff has been able to articulate his claims adequately pro se in light of 

the complexity of the issues involved. See Agyeman v. Corrs. Corp. of Am., 390 F.3d 1101, 1103 

(9th Cir. 2004). Accordingly, the request for appointment of counsel is DENIED without

Case 4:14-cv-05058-YGR Document 16 Filed 04/06/15 Page 1 of 2
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

United States District Court

Northern District of California

prejudice.1

This Order terminates Docket No. 13.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: ______________________________________

YVONNE GONZALEZ ROGERS

United States District Court Judge

 

1

The Court may of course consider appointing of counsel later in the proceedings; that is, 

after Defendant has filed a dispositive motion. At that time, the Court will be in a better position 

to consider the procedural and substantive matters at issue. Plaintiff may therefore file a renewed 

motion for the appointment of counsel after Defendant’s dispositive motion has been filed. 

April 6, 2014

Case 4:14-cv-05058-YGR Document 16 Filed 04/06/15 Page 2 of 2