IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

DISTRICT OF OREGON 

AT PORTLAND 

ANDREA OLSON, 

Plaintiff 

v CaseNo.3: l 5cv02216-HZ 

MBO PARTNERS, INC. 

Defendants 

MOTION FOR APPOINTED COUNSEL AS A REASONABLE ACCOMMODATION 

COMES NOW, I, Andrea Olson, and Plaintiff in this matter, respectfully ask this Court again for 

appointment of counsel. My medical condition significantly impacts my ability to care for 

myself or my dependent, let alone navigate a complex legal process in order to seek justice. 

I have been forced into Pro Se because I have searched for an attorney from anywhere within the 

United States with no success. Reasons given why attorneys have declined my case (in person, 

emails, and/or phone calls) have included prohibitive caseload, complexity (joint employersfederal and private sector), my disability, and/or my poverty. I am not able to represent myself 

because of my disabilities. And I am not an attorney. 

I need appointed counsel to assist me because I have a disability of Post-Traumatic Stress 

Disorder (PTSD) that has significantly impacted my ability to understand what I read and hear, 

follow instructions, think, concentrate, organize, and communicate clearly. While generally a 

very conscientious worker, I am currently re-experiencing trauma experienced representing 

myself Pro Se in the Civilian Board of Contract Appeals (CBCA). It is against my medical 

provider's recommendation for me to represent myself Pro Se. I need legal help. 

It is sickening that as an educated individual with an obvious and non-obvious disability, to be 

subjected to the humiliation of literally begging on my hands and knees for help. I am a living 

and breathing human being who possesses the human/civil right to be fairly heard. There are 

scores of attorneys defending BPA and MBO and I am alone and a non-lawyer. I cannot fathom 

a team of seasoned lawyers across the country actually feeling professionally and personally 

victorious should they succeed in silencing my voice from my Constitutional rights to be fairly 

heard and due process. I am a member of the most oppressed minority group- it is the same as 

kicking a lame dog that cannot move to get out of harm's way. This is shameful. 
In addition, I cannot afford an attorney without causing undue hardship on meeting basic needs 

for living and supporting a dependent family member. 

The Court has given me no clear rationale for ordering me to re-do all of the motions and 

documents I've submitted to the Court so far into one big document. To be judged on a single 

large document without the ability to show proof of facts seems unreasonable from a non-lawyer 

perspective. In addition, no clear step-by-step instructions were given as requested. The 

directives were ordered despite multiple pleadings to the Court that I need help and I have 

become significantly disabled. 

I have repeatedly asked the Court for help and suffered embarrassment because I cannot think 

straight despite my expertise in reasonable accommodation. In the process of seeking assistance, 

I learned that the Court's clerks themselves do not know who is responsible for reasonable 

accommodation. No one has initiated contact with me to engage in the interactive process. As it 

is still unknown to me who is responsible for reasonable accommodation in federal court, I have 

submitted confidential medical documentation addressed to this Court's unnamed "Reasonable 

Accommodation Coordinator". I respectfully request that this Court permit only those on a 

'needs to know' basis to view the documentation and would appreciate being apprised of the 

names of personnel who view the documentation. It should be noted that historically there has 

already been several breaches of confidentiality and privacy including the fact that 

approximately eight people between BP A and MBO discussed my reasonable accommodation 

requests and I was not involved in the conversation nor did I know who all those people were. 

Another incident occurred just over a year ago when BP A legal counsel released previously 

submitted medical information to MBO's legal counsel without my knowledge or consent. 

As I am without counsel and my condition has worsened, I am unable to participate within the 

deadlines given by this district Court. I do not want to delay the legal process any more, but 

without legal counsel, it is impossible for me to proceed. To date, an advocate, Ms. Dana 

Hoffman, has assisted me, but even with her help I am unable to keep up with timelines. Given 

my experiences over the past two and a half years, I do not trust the legal process at all without 

counsel. 

Judicial costs are dear to this Court and other courts, and I do not seek to waste the Court's time. 

I need appointment of counsel to maintain judicial economy and avoid estoppel due to 

untimeliness or having to file endless motions by which I am sure the Court will grow weary. I 

wish to resolve the matter as soon as possible within a reasonable time schedule issued by the 

court and appointment of counsel is necessary as a reasonable accommodation. 

Here is information on Courts providing reasonable accommodation in the form of legal counsel 

in civil cases: 
http://wvt\\.amcricanbar.org/ groups/pro lt:ssioJ1al rcspo11s i hi Ii t \/puhlications/nlQ_Qc I code 

icial conduct/model codc_Q[judicial cs)J1duct ca!IOn 2.html 

~0 ~/ 

of jud 0 

RULE 2.2 Impartiality and Fairness- judge shall uphold and apply the law,* and shall 

perform all duties of judicial office fairly and impartially.* 

( 4) It is not a Yiolation of this Rule for a Judge to make reasonable accommodations to 

ensure pro se litigants the opportunity to have their matters fairly heard. 

Rule 2.6: Ensuring the Right to Be Heard 

(A) A judge shall accord to every person who has a legal interest in a proceeding, or that 

person's lawyer, the right to be heard according to law.* 

(B) A judge may encourage parties to a proceeding and their lawyers to settle matters in dispute 

but shall not act in a manner that coerces any party into settlement. 

OR Rule 3.3 Title is identical to MCJC Rule 2.2 and Rule is similar to MCJC Rules 2.2 and 2.3. 

(A) A judge shall uphold and apply the law and perform all duties of judicial office, including 

administrative duties, fairly, impartially, and without bias or prejudice. (B) A judge shall not, in 

the performance of judicial duties, by words or conduct, manifest bias or prejudice, or engage in 

harassment, against parties, witnesses, lawyers, or others based on attributes including but not 

limited to, sex, gender identity, race, national origin, 3 As of December 11, 2015 ethnicity, 

religion, sexual orientation, marital status, disability, age, socioeconomic status, or political 

affiliation and shall not permit court staff, court officials, or others subject to the judge's 

direction and control to do so. (C) A judge shall not take any action or make any comment that a 

reasonable person would expect to impair the fairness of a matter pending or impending in any 

Oregon court. 

https://en. wikipedia.org/wiki/Pro _ se _legal _representation_ in_ the_ United_ States 

the right to represent oneself is not absolute. It is the Court's right and duty to determine if a 

particular individual is capable of representing himself. and can inquire into the individual's 

lucidity and mental status to make that determination 

h_ttps://cn. \\ ikipcdia.org/wiki/Civi I Ii bcrtics 

The passage of the Fourteenth Amendment further protected civil liberties by introducing the 

Privileges or Immunities Clause, Due Process Clause, and Equal Protection Clause. Human 

rights within the United States are often called civil rights, which are those rights, privileges and 

immunities held by all people, 

https://wW\\.law.cornell.edu/rul_\,?_~Jh:_pJ:_tJl.1,?_LZ 

Fed.R.Civ.P. 17(c). 

( c) Minor or Incompetent Person. 
( 1) With a Representative. The following representatives may sue or defend on behalf of a minor 

or an incompetent person: 

(A) a general guardian; 

(B) a committee; 

(C) a conservator; or 

(D) a like fiduciary. 

(2) Without a Representative. A minor or an incompetent person who does not have a duly 

appointed representative may sue by a next friend or by a guardian ad litem. The court 

must appoint a guardian ad litem-or issue another appropriate order-to protect a minor 

or incompetent person who is unrepresented in an action. 

In contrast to a criminal proceeding, in which the court has a duty to "assign" counsel to 

represent a defendant in accordance with his Constitutional right, Rule 44, Federal Rules of 

Criminal Procedure, 18 U.S.C.A., the court in a civil case has the statutory power only to 

"request an attorney to represent" a person unable to employ counsel. Title 28 U.S.C.A. § 

l 915(d). (Note: this information does not reference cases where disability is present) 

We recognize that the Eighth Circuit has apparently taken a different approach, allowing 

mandatory uncompensated appointment of counsel in civil cases under section 1915( d). For 

example, that court has stated: 

The district court ruled that it had no power to appoint counsel to represent an indigent 

in civil cases. This ruling overlooks the express authority given it in 28 lJ.S.C. § 1915 to 

appoint counsel in civil cases. This court and other courts of appeals regularly make these 

appointments in habeas corpus and civil rights cases; district courts throughout the 

country do the same. 

http://\\Ww.washingtonlawhclp.or_g/n:sourcc/ho\\-to-ash.::.E.~.L-a-rca~on;!hlS.::l~ccornmodation­

~)Cr~_t'C3J_QQ 

• if you cannot represent yourself in an OAH hearing due to a mental disability, such as a 

developmental disability, traumatic brain injury or mental illness. Example: your 

disability causes you to not understand what you read, follow instructions, concentrate or 

communicate clearly. 

lntp://www.wsha.org/Legal-( 'Qmm unit v/l 'om mi ttecs-Boards-and-Othcr-Groups/ J\c~ss-to-: 

Justice-Board/ ATJBLCl--/media/73292065 DIU5413 J28_65L]1\B3426806F4.ashx 

3. The United States Constitution and State Court 

Because access to the judicial process is a fundamental right, the United States Supreme Court 

has held that Title II of the ADA (note that I am aware that Title II does not apply to my case but 

I do not know the cross-reference in the federal sector) is constitutionally valid. In Tennessee v. 

Lane, the Court held that "Title II unquestionably is valid ... as it applies to the class of cases 

implicating the accessibility of judicial services [. ]" 19 The Court observed that the "duty to 

accommodate is perfectly consistent with the well-established due process principle that 'within 
the limits of practicability, a State must afford to all individuals a meaningful opportunity to be 

heard' in its courts."20 This applies equally to administrative hearings.21 

b. Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) PTSD is a debilitating condition that can occur after 

one is exposed to a traumatic event in which s/he experienced harm, was threatened with harm, 

or witnessed someone else experiencing harm. Traumatic events most often associated with 

PTSD include sexual assault, combat exposure, childhood neglect or abuse, an automobile 

accident, and physical attack.55 Common impairments: difficulty coping with stress and 

emotions, dealing with change, maintaining concentration, memory deficits, 

diarrhea/vomiting/nausea, and disorganization. 

https://lawreviewdrake.files.wordpress.com/20 l 5/06/irvol61-3 _ scieszinski.pdf 

(B) A judge shall not, in the performance of judicial duties, by words or conduct manifest bias or 

prejudice, or engage in harassment, including but not limited to bias, prejudice, or harassment 

based upon race, sex, gender, religion, national origin, ethnicity, disability, age, sexual 

orientation, marital status, socioeconomic status, or political affiliation, and shall not permit 

court staff, court officials, or others subject to the judge's direction and control to do so. 

(C) A judge shall require lawyers in proceedings before the court to refrain from manifesting 

bias or prejudice, or engaging in harassment, based upon attributes including but not limited to 

race, sex, gender, religion, national origin, ethnicity, disability, age, sexual orientation, marital 

status, socioeconomic status, or political affiliation, against parties, witnesses, lawyers, or others. 

A judge shall not, in the performance ofjudicial duties, by words or conduct manifest bias or 

prejudice, or engage in harassment, including but not limited to bias, prejudice, or harassment 

based upon race, sex, gender, religion, national origin, ethnicity, disability, age, sexual 

orientation, marital status, socioeconomic status, or political affiliation .... 85 

This motion is not interposed for delay. 

WHEREFORE for good cause shown, I Andrea Olson, Plaintiff, respectfully request this court to 

appoint counsel as a reasonable accommodation because of my disabilities and indigence in the 

interest of judicial economy and for reasons of ongoing medical/health issues. 

Respectfully submitted; 

!l~ 

Andrea Olson I Plaintiff 

3404 SW Comus St 

Portland, Or, 97219 

(503) 452-8888 

andrea.olson8888@gmail.com 

DATED: 09/02/2016 
Affidavit of Andrea Olson 

ST A TE OF OREGON 

COUNTY OF MULTNOivfAH 

The undersigned, A'Nl)REA OLSON. being duh: S\YOm. herebv deposes and savs: - < , - .. ., ... ., 

1. I am over the age of 18 and am a resident of the State of Oregon. 1 have personal kno\vledge of 

the facts herein, and, if calied as a witness, could testify completely thereto. 

2. I am not an attornev and I am still in need of le2:al counsel. . -

3. I believe that I cannot have a fair and impartial trial or hearing befure the judge. and that it is 

made in good faith a.I1d not for the purpose of delay· 

I declare that. to the best of my knmvledge and belief the infonnation herein is true. correct. and 

complete. 

--;,":"-~ .-,- :/ 

Executed this ...:.. o day of "---- ·~·. :· ;:::-. . 20 1 o ~~- -~~---v~~~~~ 

iuidrea Olson 

~OTARY ACKi~OWLEDGEI\'lENT 

STATE OF OREGON, COU>:TY OF 1vICL TNOiv!AH: 

"''"' This Affidavit \':as acknmv1edged before me on this ~ ~........ day of_ -' ..,_,_ \--: . 2 e;: G by 

Andrea Olson. who. being first duly sworn on oath according to law, deposes and says that he/she has 

read the foregoing Affidavit subscribed by him heri and that the matters stated herein are true to the 

best of his'ber information. knov.;ledge and be1 ief. 

l'<otary Public OFFlClAL STAMP 

; ROBERT BENJAMIN FALCHI 

"·§;¥::;.{ NOTARY PUSUC-OREGON . . COMMISSION NO. 950397 

MY COMMISSION EXPIRES MAY 09, 2020 Title (and Rank) 

My commission expires 
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

On September 2, 2016, I, Andrea Olson, Plaintiff, am serving Plaintiff's Motion for Appointed 

Counsel as a Reasonable Accommodation with this Court to the following parties: 

Hand-delivered to 7'11 floor: 

Honorable Marco A. Hernandez 

Mark 0. Hatfield United States Courthouse 

Room 1427 

1000 Southwest Third A venue 

Portland, OR 97204-2944 

Regular U.S. Mail: 

Jenna L. Mooney, Esq. 

jennamooney@dwt.com 

Kalia Walker, Esq. 

kaliawalker@dwt.com 

Davis Wright Tremaine, LLP 

1300 SW Fifth Avenue, Suite 2400 

Portland, OR 97201-5610 

Andrea Olson