Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_06-cv-00060/USCOURTS-caed-1_06-cv-00060-1/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

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

LAFAYETTE CADE, )

)

Plaintiff, )

)

 )

v. ) 

)

JEANNE WOODFORD, et al., )

 )

)

Defendants. )

____________________________________)

1:06-CV-0060 OWW SMS P 

 

ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR

APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL 

(DOCUMENT #4)

Plaintiff Lafayette Cade (“plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma

pauperis in a civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On January 17, 2006, plaintiff filed a

motion seeking the appointment of counsel.

The court cannot require an attorney to represent plaintiff. Mallard v. United States District

Court for the Southern District of Iowa, 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). Without a reasonable method

of securing and compensating counsel, this court will seek volunteer counsel only in the most serious

and exceptional cases. “A finding of exceptional circumstances requires an evaluation of both ‘the

likelihood of success of the merits and the ability of the [plaintiff] to articulate his claims pro se in

Case 1:06-cv-00060-OWW -SMS Document 10 Filed 03/07/06 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

 The court has not yet screened plaintiff’s complaint to determine whether it contains any cognizable claims for

1

relief. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. The court has many civil cases pending before it and will screen plaintiff’s complaint in due

course.

2

light of the complexity of the legal issues involved.’” Terrell, 935 F.2d at 1017 (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. 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. Terrell, 935 F.2d at 1017. 1

For the foregoing reasons, plaintiff’s motion for the appointment of counsel, filed January 17,

2006 is HEREBY DENIED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: March 6, 2006 /s/ Sandra M. Snyder 

i0d3h8 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:06-cv-00060-OWW -SMS Document 10 Filed 03/07/06 Page 2 of 2