Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_05-cv-05221/USCOURTS-cand-3_05-cv-05221-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 442
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights Employment
Cause of Action: 42:2000 Job Discrimination (Race)

---

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

GRACE C. BAUMGARTEN,

Plaintiff,

 v.

CALIFORNIA BOARD OF

EQUALIZATION,

Defendant. /

No. C 05-05221 WHA

ORDER DENYING REQUEST

FOR APPOINTMENT OF

COUNSEL

Plaintiff requests appointment of counsel in this Title VII employment-discrimination

case. Under Title VII, a court has discretion to appoint counsel in such circumstances as it

deems just. 42 U.S.C. 2000e-5(f)(1)(B). A court must evaluate: (1) whether the plaintiff

demonstrates an inability to pay for private counsel; (2) plaintiff’s efforts to secure counsel; and

(3) whether the claims presented have merit. Bradshaw v. Zoological Soc’y of San Diego, 662

F.2d 1301, 1318 (9th Cir. 1981).

Even assuming plaintiff could satisfy the second and third factors of the Bradshaw

analysis, plaintiff has not made a sufficient showing with respect to her lack of financial

resources. Plaintiff’s request may be denied on that ground alone. On December 22, 2005, this

Court denied plaintiff in forma pauperis status in this case. In her application for in forma

pauperis status, plaintiff indicated that her husband is employed by the San Francisco School

Case 3:05-cv-05221-WHA Document 7 Filed 01/23/06 Page 1 of 2
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

District and earns a gross salary of $5,053 per month, a fact plaintiff omits from her December

16, 2005 letter. Plaintiff also indicated in her application that she and her husband own a house

worth an estimated market value of $615,000, although plaintiff contends in her instant request

that the mortgage payments are cumbersome. Plaintiff is currently unemployed, but within the

past year she received disability benefits totaling a gross of $3,550 per month according to her

in forma pauperis application. These facts evidence a lack of merit for appointment of counsel. 

Plaintiff’s request, therefore, is DENIED. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: January 23, 2006 WILLIAM ALSUP

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:05-cv-05221-WHA Document 7 Filed 01/23/06 Page 2 of 2