Russell v. United States

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

11 Case No. 21-cv-1029-DMS (LL) CHRISTINE ANN RUSSELL, an 12 individual, ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR APPOINTMENT 13 Plaintiff, OF COUNSEL

14 v.

AMERICA; DR. LAURA MILLER 16 MD, DR. STACEY CHARAT MD.; DR. ALLYSON DAVIS MD;

18 Defendants. 19 20 Pending before the Court is Plaintiff’s motion for appointment of counsel. 21 The Court denies the motion for the following reasons. In general, there is no 22 constitutional right to counsel in a civil case. Palmer v. Valdez, 560 F.3d 965, 970 23 (9th Cir. 2009) (citing Storseth v. Spellman, 654 F.2d 1349, 1353 (9th Cir. 1981)). 24 In “exceptional circumstances,” however, a court may exercise its discretion and 25 “request an attorney to represent any person unable to afford counsel.” 28 U.S.C. 26 § 1915(e)(1); Palmer, 560 F.3d at 970. The court must consider both “‘the 27 likelihood of success on the merits as well as the ability of the [Plaintiff] to articulate 1 ||560 F.3d at 970 (quoting Weygandt v. Look, 718 F.2d 952, 954 (9th Cir. 1983)). At 2 ||this point, there are no exceptional circumstances warranting appointment of 3 ||/counsel. Accordingly, the Court denies Plaintiff's motion without prejudice. 5 Dated: June 28, 2021 \ g f a Yn. 6 Hon. Dana M. Sabraw, Chief Judge 7 United States District Court 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28