Anthony McMichael v. University Medical Center, Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department, Clark County, State of Nevada

Opinion

1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

2 DISTRICT OF NEVADA

3 * * *

4 ANTHONY MCMICHAEL, Case No. 2:25-cv-01829-CDS-EJY

5 Plaintiff, ORDER 6 v.

7 UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER, LAS VEGAS METROPOLITAN POLICE 8 DEPARTMENT, CLARK COUNTY, STATE OF NEVADA, 9 Defendants. 10 11 Pending before the Court are Plaintiff’s Motions for Appointment of Counsel (ECF No. 9) 12 and to Extend Time (ECF No. 10). Plaintiff requests counsel asserting he is an inmate with no 13 consistent law library access, he has limited knowledge of the law, and he is unable to retain a lawyer 14 through his own efforts. ECF No. 9 at 1-2. 15 As a general proposition, a civil litigant has no right to counsel. Lassiter v. Department of 16 Social Services of Durham County, 452 U.S. 18 (1981); Storseth v. Spellman, 654 F.2d 1349, 1353 17 (9th Cir. 1981). Under “exceptional circumstances” a court may appoint counsel for indigent civil 18 litigants pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1). Agyeman v. Corrs. Corp. of Am., 390 F.3d 1101, 1103 19 (9th Cir. 2004), cert. denied sub nom. Gerber v. Agyeman, 545 U.S. 1128 (2005). When determining 20 whether “exceptional circumstances” exist, a court must consider “the likelihood of success on the 21 merits as well as the ability of the petitioner to articulate his claims pro se in light of the complexity 22 of the legal issues involved.” Weygandt v. Look, 718 F.2d 952, 954 (9th Cir. 1983). 23 The Court finds that Plaintiff fails to establish the extraordinary circumstances to support 24 appointment of counsel. The lack of adequate legal knowledge, even assuming a case is legally 25 complex, is not an exceptional circumstance “in light of the legal competence of most prisoners in 26 similar situations.” Zamaro v. Moonga, 656 Fed.Appx. 297, 299 (9th Cir. 2016). And, “the 27 Constitution does not require the elimination of all economic, intellectual, and technological barriers 1 Nash, Case No. 21-cv-00075-RFB-VCF; see also Wood v. Housewright, 900 F.2d 1332, 1335 (9th 2 Cir. 1990) (finding that prisoner litigants’ lack of a legal education does not constitute exceptional 3 circumstances). Further, indigence and limited law library access are circumstances common to 4 most prisoners and do not establish extraordinary circumstances. See Baker v. Macomber, Case No. 5 2:15-cv-00248-TLN-AC, 2020 WL 1182495, at *1 (E.D. Cal. Mar. 12, 2020) (finding that 6 “[c]ircumstances common to most prisoners, such as lack of legal education and limited law library 7 access, do not establish exceptional circumstances that warrant a request for voluntary assistance of 8 counsel”). Plaintiff’s Motion seeking appointment of counsel is denied. 9 Plaintiff also requests to extend the time to file his amended complaint. In order to ensure 10 Plaintiff has sufficient time to craft an amended complaint, the Court extends the due date for such 11 filing to March 6, 2026. 12 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Motion for Appointment of 13 Counsel (ECF No. 9) is DENIED. 14 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Motion to Extend Time (ECF No. 10) is 15 GRANTED. 16 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff’s amended complaint is due no later than March 17 6, 2026. 18 Dated this 3rd day of February, 2026. 19

20 ELAYNA J. YOUCHAH 21 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

22 23 24 25 26 27