Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_22-cv-02300/USCOURTS-caed-2_22-cv-02300-2/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

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

FORREST KENDRID,

Plaintiff,

v.

R. SCOTT, et al.,

Defendants.

No. 2:22-cv-02300-CKD P

ORDER

Plaintiff is a civil detainee proceeding pro se in an action brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. 

Currently pending before the court are plaintiff’s motion for the appointment of counsel and a 

motion to amend his complaint. The court will address each motion in turn.

I. Motion for Counsel

Plaintiff requests that the court appoint counsel. District courts lack authority to require 

counsel to represent indigent prisoners in section 1983 cases. Mallard v. United States Dist. 

Court, 490 U.S. 296, 298 (1989). In exceptional circumstances, the court may request an attorney 

to voluntarily represent such a plaintiff. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1); Terrell v. Brewer, 935 F.2d 

1015, 1017 (9th Cir. 1991); Wood v. Housewright, 900 F.2d 1332, 1335-36 (9th Cir. 1990). 

When determining whether “exceptional circumstances” exist, the court must consider plaintiff’s 

likelihood of success on the merits as well as the ability of the plaintiff to articulate his claims pro 

se in light of the complexity of the legal issues involved. Palmer v. Valdez, 560 F.3d 965, 970 

Case 2:22-cv-02300-DAD-CKD Document 26 Filed 10/17/23 Page 1 of 3
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

(9th Cir. 2009) (district court did not abuse discretion in declining to appoint counsel). The 

burden of demonstrating exceptional circumstances is on the plaintiff. Id. Circumstances 

common to most prisoners, such as lack of legal education and limited law library access, do not 

establish exceptional circumstances that warrant a request for voluntary assistance of counsel. 

Having considered the factors under Palmer, the court finds that plaintiff has failed to 

meet his burden of demonstrating exceptional circumstances warranting the appointment of 

counsel at this time. Despite plaintiff’s physical and mental disabilities, his pleadings are 

coherent and logical. 

II. Motion to Amend

On May 23, 2023, the court screened plaintiff’s complaint and ordered that this case 

proceed against defendants R. Scott, S. Scott, Lautenslager, and John Doe Psychiatric Technician 

based on Eighth Amendment deliberate indifference claims. ECF No. 6. In the same order, 

plaintiff was advised that service could not be initiated against the John Doe Psychiatric 

Technician until “plaintiff has identified his or her real name and amended the complaint to 

substitute this defendant’s actual name.” ECF No. 6 at 1, n. 1. Plaintiff has filed a one page 

notice identifying the name of the John Doe Psychiatric Technician described in the complaint. 

ECF No. 12. The court liberally construes plaintiff’s notice as a motion to amend his complaint

to identify the John Doe defendant in this case. However, plaintiff’s motion was not

accompanied by a proposed amended complaint that substitutes the actual name of the John Doe 

Psychiatric Technician. As a result, the court denies plaintiff’s motion to amend without 

prejudice to refiling along with a proposed first amended complaint within 30 days from the date 

of this order. 

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Plaintiff’s motion for the appointment of counsel (ECF No. 16) is denied without 

prejudice.

2. Plaintiff’s notice docketed on August 3, 2023 is construed as a motion to amend the 

complaint. So construed, the motion (ECF No. 12) is denied without prejudice to refiling with a 

proposed first amended complaint identifying all defendants by their actual names within 30 days 

Case 2:22-cv-02300-DAD-CKD Document 26 Filed 10/17/23 Page 2 of 3
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

3

from the date of this order.

Dated: October 17, 2023

12/kend2300.31.new+m2amend

_____________________________________

CAROLYN K. DELANEY

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 2:22-cv-02300-DAD-CKD Document 26 Filed 10/17/23 Page 3 of 3