Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_06-cv-01003/USCOURTS-casd-3_06-cv-01003-3/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 - 06cv1003-BTM (POR)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

RELAUN DEADMON, Civil No. 06cv1003-BTM (POR)

Plaintiff, ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S

MOTION FOR APPOINTMENT OF

COUNSEL

[Doc. No. 43]

v.

N. GRANNIS, et al.,

Defendant.

On May 8, 2006, Plaintiff, a pro se proceeding in forma pauperis, filed a complaint pursuant

to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On August 22, 2006, Defendants filed a motion to dismiss, which the Court

denied on January 30, 2007. Defendants then filed an answer on February 16, 2007. On April 9,

2008, Plaintiff filed a motion for appointment of counsel. In support of his motion, Plaintiff argues

he lacks the ability to articulate his claims and the issues in his case are particularly complex. 

Specifically, Plaintiff states he needs appointed counsel to secure an expert witness who can

evaluate his medical records. If the Court denies his request for appointed counsel, Plaintiff

requests, in the alternative, that an expert witness be appointed. After thorough review of Plaintiff’s

motion, the Court hereby GRANTS his motion for appointment of counsel.

“[T]here is no absolute right to counsel in civil proceedings.” Hedges v. Resolution Trust

Corp. (In re Hedges), 32 F.3d 1360, 1363 (9th Cir. 1994) (citation omitted). Thus, federal courts do

not have the authority “to make coercive appointments of counsel.” Mallard v. United States

District Court, 490 U.S. 296, 310 (1989); see also United States v. $292,888.04 in U.S. Currency, 54

F.3d 564, 569 (9th Cir. 1995). 

Case 3:06-cv-01003-BTM-POR Document 60 Filed 08/14/08 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 - 06cv1003-BTM (POR)

However, “[t]itle 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1) permits the district court, in its discretion, to

‘request an attorney to represent any person unable to afford counsel.’” Solis v. County of Los

Angeles, 514 F.3d 946, 958 (9th Cir. 2008) (quoting 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1)); see also Agyeman v.

Corr. Corp. of Am., 390 F.3d 1101, 1103 (9th Cir. 2004). Such discretion may be exercised upon a

showing of exceptional circumstances. See Terrell v. Brewer, 935 F.2d 1015, 1017 (9th Cir. 1991);

Burns v. County of King, 883 F.2d 819, 823 (9th Cir. 1989). “To show exceptional circumstances

the litigant must demonstrate the likelihood of success and complexity of the legal issues involved.” 

Burns, 883 F.2d at 823 (citation omitted); Hedges, 32 F.3d at 1363; Wood v. Housewright, 900 F.2d

1332, 1335 (9th Cir. 1990). Neither the likelihood of success nor the complexity of the case are

dispositive; both must be considered. Terrell, 935 F.2d at 1017; Wilborn v. Escalderon, 789 F.2d

1328, 1331 (9th Cir. 1986). 

The Court has reviewed the likelihood of success and complexity of Plaintiff’s case. There

appears to be a medical issue that is too complex for Plaintiff and requires an expert to assist the trier

of fact. Based thereon, the Court finds Plaintiff has demonstrated exceptional circumstances that

warrant appointment of counsel, and therefore, GRANTS Plaintiff’s motion. 

The Court has sought representation for Plaintiff through the San Diego Volunteer Lawyer

Program (“SDVLP”). The SDVLP has identified and appointed Peter M. Adams, Esq. of Cooley

Godward Kronish, LLP, 4401 Eastgate Mall San Diego, CA 92121. His telephone number is

(858) 550-6059. The Court orders Mr. Adams to file a Notice of Appearance forthwith and directs

him to Civil Local Rule 83.8. 

The Court further schedules a Case Management Conference on August 25, 2008 at 10:00

a.m. The conference shall be in person, with attorneys only. Counsel shall contact the Court

immediately to reschedule this conference or request that it be a telephonic.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: August 14, 2008

LOUISA S PORTER

United States Magistrate Judge

cc: The Honorable Barry T. Moskowitz

all parties

Case 3:06-cv-01003-BTM-POR Document 60 Filed 08/14/08 Page 2 of 2