Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_11-cv-00456/USCOURTS-caed-1_11-cv-00456-3/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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

MICHAEL B. WILLIAMS,

Plaintiff,

vs.

DEBBIE PHILLIPS. et al.,

Defendants. 

________________________________/

1:11-cv-00456-GBC- (PC)

ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR

EXPEDITED SERVICE AND DENYING

MOTION FOR

APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL

( DOCUMENT #21)

On August 22, 2011, Plaintiff filed a motion seeking the appointment of counsel and a

motion requesting service to be expedite. (Doc. 21). As service has already been accomplished, 1

Plaintiff’s motion with regards to service is denied as moot. Regarding his request for appointed

counsel, Plaintiff does not have a constitutional right to appointed counsel in this action, Rand v.

Rowland, 113 F.3d 1520, 1525 (9th Cir. 1997), and the court cannot require an attorney to represent

plaintiff pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1). Mallard v. United States District Court for the

Southern District of Iowa, 490 U.S. 296, 298, 109 S.Ct. 1814, 1816 (1989). However, in certain

exceptional circumstances the court may request the voluntary assistance of counsel pursuant to

section 1915(e)(1). Rand, 113 F.3d at 1525. 

In the future, Plaintiff is instructed to file his motions separately rather than include several motions in one

1

filing.

-1-

Case 1:11-cv-00456-GSA Document 27 Filed 09/22/11 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

Without a reasonable method of securing and compensating counsel, the court will seek

volunteer counsel only in the most serious and exceptional cases. In determining whether

“exceptional circumstances exist, the district court must evaluate both the likelihood of success of

the merits [and] the ability of the [plaintiff] to articulate his claims pro se in light of the complexity

of the legal issues involved.” Id. (internal quotation marks and citations omitted).

In the present case, the court does not find the required exceptional circumstances. Even if

it is assumed that plaintiff is not well versed in the law and that he has made serious allegations

which, if proved, would entitle him to relief, his case is not exceptional. This court is faced with

similar cases almost daily. Further, at this early stage in the proceedings, the court cannot make a

determination that plaintiff is likely to succeed on the merits, and based on a review of the record

in this case, the court does not find that plaintiff cannot adequately articulate his claims. Id.

For the foregoing reasons, Plaintiff’s motion for the appointment of counsel is HEREBY

DENIED, without prejudice. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: September 21, 2011 

0jh02o UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 

-2-

Case 1:11-cv-00456-GSA Document 27 Filed 09/22/11 Page 2 of 2