From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

TUNSTALL v. VEAL

United States District Court, E.D. California
Sep 28, 2006
No. CIV S-06-0727 LKK PAN P (E.D. Cal. Sep. 28, 2006)

Opinion

No. CIV S-06-0727 LKK PAN P.

September 28, 2006


ORDER


Plaintiff has requested the appointment of counsel. The United States Supreme Court has ruled that district courts lack authority to require counsel to represent indigent prisoners in § 1983 cases. Mallard v. United States Dist. Court, 490 U.S. 296, 298 (1989). In certain exceptional circumstances, the court may request the voluntary assistance of counsel pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1). Terrell v. Brewer, 935 F.2d 1015, 1017 (9th Cir. 1991); Wood v. Housewright, 900 F.2d 1332, 1335-36 (9th Cir. 1990). In the present case, the court does not find the required exceptional circumstances. Plaintiff's motion for the appointment of counsel will therefore be denied.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff's September 14, 2006 motion for the appointment of counsel is denied.


Summaries of

TUNSTALL v. VEAL

United States District Court, E.D. California
Sep 28, 2006
No. CIV S-06-0727 LKK PAN P (E.D. Cal. Sep. 28, 2006)
Case details for

TUNSTALL v. VEAL

Case Details

Full title:ROBERT WILLIAM TUNSTALL, Plaintiff, v. M. VEAL, Warden, et al., Defendants

Court:United States District Court, E.D. California

Date published: Sep 28, 2006

Citations

No. CIV S-06-0727 LKK PAN P (E.D. Cal. Sep. 28, 2006)