Nguyen v. Mercer Island Boys Basketball Booster Club

Opinion

5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 6 FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE 7

8 ELLE NGUYEN, et al., CASE NO. 2:24-cv-01990-RSL 9 Plaintiffs, v. 10

11 MERCER ISLAND BOYS BASKETBALL ORDER

BOOSTER CLUB, 12 Defendant. 13

15 This matter comes before the Court on plaintiffs’ second motion for appointment of 16 counsel. Dkt. # 62. The motion is denied. Ms. Nguyen’s evidence of a medical crisis that 17 impairs her ability to represent herself and her children is unpersuasive, consisting of no 18 more than evidence that she has been seen by doctors on certain dates. Her ability to 19 20 reason, write, and articulate arguments in the legal setting does not appear to be lacking in 21 any way, see Dkt. # 57, and introducing a new attorney at this point in the litigation would 22 have an adverse and significant impact on the efficient and prompt resolution of this case. 23 24 25 26 ORDER - 1 1 The circumstances of this case are not extraordinary and do not warrant appointment of 2 counsel.1 3 4 DATED this 14th day of May, 2025. 5 6 A 7 Robert S. Lasnik 8 United States District Judge 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 1 The Ninth Circuit advised in Palmer v. Valdez, 560 F.3d 965, 970 (9th Cir. 2009): 23 Generally, a person has no right to counsel in civil actions. See Storseth v. Spellman, 654 F.2d 1349, 24 1353 (9th Cir. 1981). However, a court may under “exceptional circumstances” appoint counsel for indigent civil litigants pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1). Agyeman v. Corrs. Corp. of Am., 390 F.3d 1101, 1103 (9th Cir. 2004). When determining whether “exceptional circumstances” exist, a 25 court must consider “the likelihood of success on the merits as well as the ability of the petitioner to articulate his claims pro se in light of the complexity of the legal issues involved.” Weygandt v. 26 Look, 718 F.2d 952, 954 (9th Cir. 1983). Neither of these considerations is dispositive and instead must be viewed together. Wilborn v. Escalderon, 789 F.2d 1328, 1331 (9th Cir. 1986). ORDER - 2