Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-3_10-cv-08001/USCOURTS-azd-3_10-cv-08001-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 442
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights Employment
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Civil Rights (Employment Discrimination)

---

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

WO

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Grace P. Thompson, 

Plaintiff, 

vs.

The State of Arizona; Coconino County;

City of Flagstaff; Superior Court of

Coconino County; and Deborah Young, 

Defendants. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CV-10-8001-PCT-DGC

ORDER

Plaintiff filed a complaint against Defendants alleging that the administration of a

process server examination violated state and federal law and Plaintiff’s civil rights. Dkt. #1.

Plaintiff has requested leave to proceed in forma pauperis. Dkt. ##4, 6. Having reviewed

the application and financial affidavit, the Court finds that Plaintiff cannot afford to pay the

filing fee. The Court therefore will grant Plaintiff leave to proceed without prepayment of

costs or fees or the necessity of giving security therefore. Plaintiff shall be responsible for

service of process on all Defendants pursuant to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

Plaintiff has requested the appointment of counsel. Dkt. #4. The Court will deny that

request. There is no constitutional right to appointed counsel in a civil case. See Ivey v. Bd.

of Regents of Univ. of Alaska, 673 F.2d 266, 269 (9th Cir. 1982). Plaintiff has not

demonstrated a likelihood of success on the merits. Nor has she shown an inability to

articulate her claims pro se in light of the complexity of the legal issues involved. The Court

does not find the “exceptional circumstances” necessary to the appointment of counsel. See

Case 3:10-cv-08001-DGC Document 7 Filed 02/08/10 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

- 2 -

Wilborn v. Escalderon, 789 F.2d 1328, 1331 (9th Cir. 1986); Aldabe v. Aldabe, 616 F.2d

1089, 1093 (9th Cir. 1980).

IT IS ORDERED:

1. Plaintiff’s request for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (Dkt. ##4, 6) is

granted. Plaintiff may proceed with this case without prepayment of costs or

fees or the necessity of giving security therefore.

2. Plaintiff shall be responsible for service of process on all Defendants.

3. Plaintiff’s request for appointment of counsel (Dkt. #4) is denied.

DATED this 5th day of February, 2010.

Case 3:10-cv-08001-DGC Document 7 Filed 02/08/10 Page 2 of 2