Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_01-cv-02689/USCOURTS-cand-4_01-cv-02689-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 555
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Prison Condition
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Prisoner Civil Rights

---

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

1

 Defendants County and Chalk have already been served in this action.

 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JAMISE JERMAINE CALLOWAY,

Plaintiff, 

v.

CONTRA COSTA COUNTY JAIL

CORRECTIONAL OFFICERS, et al.,

Defendants. _______________________________________

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. C 01-2689 SBA (PR)

ORDER GRANTING

APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL

AND REFERRING CASE TO

FEDERAL PRO BONO PROJECT

(Docket no. 55)

On May 12, 2005, Plaintiff filed a request for appointment of counsel. 

I. Legal Standards

There is no constitutional right to counsel in a civil case unless an indigent litigant may lose

his physical liberty if he loses the litigation. See Lassiter v. Dep't of Social Services, 452 U.S. 18, 25

(1981); Rand v. Rowland, 113 F.3d 1520, 1525 (9th Cir. 1997) (no constitutional right to counsel in §

1983 action), withdrawn in part on other grounds on reh'g en banc, 154 F.3d 952 (9th Cir. 1998) (en

banc). Title 28 U.S.C. § 1915 confers on a district court only the power to "request" that counsel

represent a litigant who is proceeding in forma pauperis. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1). This does not

give the courts the power to make "coercive appointments of counsel." Mallard v. United States Dist.

Court, 490 U.S. 296, 310 (1989).

The court may ask counsel to represent an indigent litigant under § 1915 only in "exceptional

circumstances," the determination of which requires an evaluation of both (1) the likelihood of

success on the merits and (2) the ability of the plaintiff to articulate his claims pro se in light of the

complexity of the legal issues involved. See Rand, 113 F.3d at 1525; Terrell v. Brewer, 935 F.2d

1015, 1017 (9th Cir. 1991); Wilborn v. Escalderon, 789 F.2d 1328, 1331 (9th Cir. 1986). Both of

these factors must be viewed together before reaching a decision on a request for counsel under §

1915. See id.

II. Analysis

On June 10, 2005, the Court issued its Fourth Order of Service and ordered service of six

additional defendants in this action.1 Since that date, the attorney representing all but one of the

Case 4:01-cv-02689-SBA Document 77 Filed 07/25/05 Page 1 of 3
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

 Attorney Bernard Louis Knapp, Deputy County Counsel, County of Contra Costa, is

representing all the defendants in this action, except for Defendant Brooks. Attorney Knapp informed

the Court that Defendant Brooks had not yet been served as of the case management conference on July

14, 2005.

2

defendants in this action2 explained that he intends to conduct further discovery, including the

deposition of Plaintiff, before filing a dispositive motion in this action. Defendants' attorney has also

represented to the Court that certain claims in this action will not be resolved by a relatively simple

dispositive motion, but rather will require resolution of complex factual issues by way of a trial or

otherwise. Plaintiff has attempted to conduct discovery on his own behalf, with limited success. 

Plaintiff has demonstrated diligence, but clearly is unfamiliar with discovery processes and is

impeded by the relatively severe conditions of his confinement. For all of the foregoing reasons, the

Court finds that "exceptional circumstances" exist to warrant appointment of counsel and exercises its

discretion to seek pro bono representation for Plaintiff.

III. Conclusion

1. Plaintiff's motion for appointment of counsel (Docket no. 55) is GRANTED.

2. The Court having determined that it would be beneficial to have counsel assist Plaintiff

in this matter and good and just cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff's case

shall be referred to the Court's Federal Pro Bono Project in the manner set forth below:

a. The Clerk of the Court shall send the Federal Pro Bono Project a copy of this

Order.

b. Upon designation of a volunteer law firm by the Federal Pro Bono Project, the

Clerk of the Court shall send the law firm copies of: (1) this Order; (2) the second amended complaint

(Docket No. 53), (3) the third amended complaint (Docket No. 62); (4) the Court’s February 11,

2004, April 29, 2004, and both March 31, 2005 Orders (Docket Nos. 15, 20, 46, 47); (5) the Fourth

Order of Service (Docket no. 61); (6) a docket sheet; and (7) a copy of the Federal Pro Bono Project

guidelines. c. Upon the law firm's designation of an attorney to represent plaintiff,

that attorney shall be appointed as counsel for Plaintiff in this matter until further order of the Court. 

3. All further proceedings will be stayed until two (2) weeks from the date an attorney is

appointed to represent Plaintiff in this action.

Case 4:01-cv-02689-SBA Document 77 Filed 07/25/05 Page 2 of 3
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

3

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED:7/25/05 ______________________________ 

SAUNDRA BROWN ARMSTRONG

United States District Judge

Case 4:01-cv-02689-SBA Document 77 Filed 07/25/05 Page 3 of 3