Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_11-cv-00068/USCOURTS-caed-1_11-cv-00068-13/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

BRYAN E. RANSOM,

Plaintiff,

v.

DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS & 

REHABILITATION, et al.,

Defendant(s).

1:11-cv-00068 AWI MJS (PC) 

ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR

APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL 

(Document# 64)

On May 26, 2015, Plaintiff filed a motion seeking the appointment of counsel. 

Plaintiff does not have a constitutional right to appointed counsel in this action, Rand v. 

Rowland, 113 F.3d 1520, 1525 (9th Cir. 1997), and the Court cannot require an attorney 

to represent Plaintiff pursuant to 28 U.S.C. ' 1915(e)(1), 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 

section 1915(e)(1). Rand, 113 F.3d at 1525. However, without a reasonable method of 

securing and compensating counsel, the Court will seek volunteer counsel only in the 

most serious and exceptional cases. In determining whether Aexceptional circumstances 

exist, the district court must evaluate both the likelihood of success of the merits [and] 

the ability of the [plaintiff] to articulate his claims pro se in light of the complexity of the 

Case 1:11-cv-00068-AWI-MJS Document 65 Filed 05/29/15 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

legal issues involved.@ Id. (internal quotation marks and citations omitted).

In the present case, the Court does not find the required exceptional 

circumstances for appointment of counsel. 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. Further, 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. Rand, 113 F.3d at 1525. 

For the foregoing reasons, Plaintiff=s motion for the appointment of counsel is 

HEREBY DENIED, without prejudice.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: May 29, 2015 /s/Michael J. Seng 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:11-cv-00068-AWI-MJS Document 65 Filed 05/29/15 Page 2 of 2