Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_15-cv-00993/USCOURTS-casd-3_15-cv-00993-5/pdf.json

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

---

1

15cv993-BEN (BLM)

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

TUANJA EDWARD ANDERSON,

Plaintiff,

v.

A. HERNANDEZ, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No.: 15cv993-BEN (BLM)

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S 

REQUEST FOR APPOINTMENT OF 

COUNSEL

[ECF No. 46]

On October 5, 2016, Plaintiff signed a “Request for Appointment of Counsel,” which the 

Court accepted on discrepancy on October 20, 2016. ECF Nos. 45, 46. In support, Plaintiff 

alleges that he is legally blind and is housed in a mental facility where he is receiving “treatment 

for PTSD because of issues related to this action.” ECF No. 46 at 1-2. Plaintiff also contends 

that the issues in this case are complex, and that he lacks knowledge, education, and legal 

resources to represent himself. See id. 

The Constitution provides no right to appointment of counsel in a civil case unless an 

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

Servs., 452 U.S. 18, 25 (1981). However, under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1), courts have the 

Case 3:15-cv-00993-BEN-BLM Document 50 Filed 11/17/16 Page 1 of 3
2

15cv993-BEN (BLM)

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

authority to “request” that an attorney represent indigent civil litigants upon a showing of 

“exceptional circumstances.” Agyeman v. Corr. Corp. of Am., 390 F.3d 1101, 1103 (9th Cir. 

2004). A finding of exceptional circumstances demands at least “an evaluation of the likelihood 

of the plaintiff’s success on the merits and an evaluation of the plaintiff’s ability to articulate his 

claims ‘in light of the complexity of the legal issues involved.’” Id. (quoting Wilborn v. 

Escalderon, 789 F.2d 1328, 1331 (9th Cir. 1986)). 

The Court notes that on August 13, 2015, the District Judge denied Plaintiff’s two motions

to appoint counsel. ECF No. 12 at 1, 3-4; see also ECF Nos. 2 & 11. In his initial motions 

Plaintiff argued that the appointment of counsel was warranted because he was disabled, 

indigent, in custody, and had limited access to legal resources and limited knowledge of the law. 

See ECF Nos. 2 & 11. The District Judge found that Plaintiff was capable of articulating the 

factual basis for his claims, that Plaintiff’s likelihood of success on the merits was not clear, and 

that neither the interests of justice nor any exceptional circumstances warranted the

appointment of counsel. ECF No. 12 at 4.

Plaintiff’s cited reasons for the appointment of counsel in this motion parallel those 

asserted in his prior motions. See ECF Nos. 2 & 11. Having reviewed Plaintiff’s additional 

arguments, the Court finds that they do not present a basis for reversing the Court’s prior 

decision. Since the District Judge’s denial of Plaintiff’s initial requests to appoint counsel, Plaintiff 

has drafted and submitted oppositions to Defendants’ motion for summary judgment and motion 

to dismiss Plaintiff’s complaint [ECF Nos. 28, 29, 32], a motion for injunction [ECF No. 34], a 

reply to this Court’s Report and Recommendation [ECF No. 39], a First Amended Complaint [ECF 

No. 42], a motion for temporary restraining order [ECF No. 48], and change of address notices

[ECF No. 22, 27, 36]. The above documents indicate that Plaintiff is able to adequately articulate 

Case 3:15-cv-00993-BEN-BLM Document 50 Filed 11/17/16 Page 2 of 3
3

15cv993-BEN (BLM)

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

the factual and legal basis of his claims and the Court notes that his pending First Amended 

Complaint is comprehensible. See id. Plaintiff’s claims do not appear to be particularly complex 

and Plaintiff to date has sufficiently articulated his claims and legal arguments without counsel. 

Accordingly, the Court DENIES without prejudice Plaintiff’s motion for appointment of counsel.

See Agyeman, 390 F.3d at 1103; Wilborn, 789 F.2d at 1331.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: 11/17/2016

Case 3:15-cv-00993-BEN-BLM Document 50 Filed 11/17/16 Page 3 of 3