Humphries v. Button

Opinion

2 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 3 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 4 SAGE HUMPHRIES, GINA Case No.: 2:21-cv-01412-ART-EJY 5 MENICHINO, ROSEMARIE DeANGELO, DANIELLE GUTIERREZ, ORDER REFERRING CASE TO 6 JANE DOE 1, AND JANE DOE 2 SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE AND APPOINTING COUNSEL 7 Plaintiffs, v. 8 MITCHELL TAYLOR BUTTON and 9 DUSTY BUTTON,

10 Defendants. 11 On October 13, 2023, this Court held a status conference to discuss 12 parties’ interest in referring this case to a settlement conference. (ECF No. 282.) 13 Both parties consented to the referral. (Id.) The Court grants the referral and will 14 also appoint counsel for Defendants for the limited purpose of the settlement 15 conference in recognition of the extraordinary circumstances meriting this action. 16 While a party has no right to counsel in civil actions, see Storseth v. 17 Spellman, 654 F.2d 1349, 1353 (9th Cir. 1981), the Court may request an 18 attorney for a party proceeding in forma pauperis in exceptional circumstances. 19 See 28 U.S.C. § 1915 (e) (1); see also Terrell v. Brewer, 935 F.2d 1015, 1017 (9th 20 Cir. 1991). In order to determine whether exceptional circumstances exist, a court 21 must consider: (1) “the likelihood of success on the merits”; and (2) “the ability of 22 the petitioner to articulate [their] claims pro se in light of the complexity of the 23 legal issues involved.” Palmer v. Valdez, 560 F.3d 965, 970 (9th Cir. 2009) 24 (quoting Weygandt v. Look, 718 F.2d 952, 954 (9th Cir. 1983)). Neither of these 25 considerations is dispositive and the Court must examine them together. Id. 26 (citing Wilbur v. Escalderon, 789 F.2d 1328, 1331 (9th Cir. 1986). 27 Defendants demonstrate exceptional circumstances justifying appointing 28 counsel. Defendants are proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in a complex 1 || case involving multiple parties and multiple claims and counterclaims. In 2 || addition, parties are more likely to favorably resolve the issues in a settlement 3 || conference with the assistance of counsel familiar with the settlement process. 4 For these reasons, the Court finds that extraordinary circumstances exist 5 || which merit the appointment of counsel for Defendants. As such, the Court will 6 || appoint pro bono counsel to represent Defendants for the settlement conference 7 || unless Defendants declare their desire that the Court not appoint counsel. 8 It is therefore ordered that this case is referred to Magistrate Judge Koppe 9 || for settlement. 10 It is further ordered that the Clerk of Court refer this case to the Pro Bono 11 || Program for appointment of counsel for the limited purpose of the settlement 12 || conference unless Defendants notify the Court that they do not desire 13 || appointment of counsel. 14 It is further ordered that the Clerk of Court forward this order to the Pro 15 || Bono Liaison. 16 17 18 DATED THIS 20t day of October 2023. 19 20 en Arve Hossa

22 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 23 24 25 26 27 28