(PC) Ellis v. County of El Dorado

• Court: District Court, E.D. California
• Decided: June 10, 2022
• Docket: 2:22-cv-00823
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 PETER JON ELLIS, Case No. 2:22-cv-00823-JDP (PC) 12 Plaintiff, ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO AMEND THE COMPLAINT 13 v. AND DENYING HIS MOTION TO APPOINT COUNSEL 14 COUNTY OF EL DORADO, et al., ECF Nos. 7 & 8 15 Defendants. THIRTY-DAY DEADLINE 16 17 18 Plaintiff Peter Jon Ellis is proceeding without counsel in this civil rights action brought 19 under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. ECF No. 1. Before the court screened his complaint, plaintiff filed a 20 motion to amend it. ECF No. 8. The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure permit plaintiff to amend 21 his complaint as a matter of course before service of a responsive pleading. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 22 15(a). Accordingly, his motion to amend is granted, and plaintiff shall file an amended complaint 23 within thirty days of this order’s entry. Plaintiff is advised that his amended complaint will 24 supersede his original complaint. 25 Plaintiff has also moved for the appointment of counsel. ECF No. 7. Plaintiff does not 26 have a constitutional right to appointed counsel in this action, see Rand v. Rowland, 113 F.3d 27 1520, 1525 (9th Cir. 1997), and the court lacks the authority to require an attorney to represent 28 plaintiff. See Mallard v. U.S. Dist. Ct. for the S. Dist. of Iowa, 490 U.S. 296, 298 (1989). The 1 | court can request the voluntary assistance of counsel. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1) (“The court 2 || may request an attorney to represent any person unable to afford counsel”); Rand, 113 F.3d at 3 1525. But without a means to compensate counsel, the court will seek volunteer counsel only in 4 | exceptional circumstances. In determining whether such circumstances exist, “the district court 5 | must evaluate both the likelihood of success on the merits [and] the ability of the [plaintiff] to 6 || articulate his claims pro se in light of the complexity of the legal issues involved.” Rand, 113 7 | F.3d at 1525 (internal quotation marks and citations omitted). 8 Having considered these factors, the court does find not that there are exceptional 9 | circumstances warranting appointment of counsel. Plaintiffs motion is therefore denied as to his 10 | request for appointment of counsel. 11 It is ORDERED that: 12 1. Plaintiff's motion to amend the complaint, ECF No. 8, is granted. 13 2. Plaintiff shall file an amended complaint within thirty days of this order’s entry. 14 3. Plaintiff's motion for appointment of counsel, ECF No. 7, is denied without prejudice. 15 16 IT IS SO ORDERED. 17 ( 1 Sy — Dated: _ June 10, 2022 q_-—_— 18 JEREMY D. PETERSON 19 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28