Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Paynes v. Runnels

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA


January 16, 2009

LORENZO CARL PAYNES, PLAINTIFF,
v.
D.L. RUNNELS, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.

ORDER

Plaintiff has requested the appointment of counsel. The United States Supreme Court has ruled that district courts lack authority to require counsel to represent indigent prisoners in § 1983 cases. Mallard v. United States Dist. Court, 490 U.S. 296, 298 (1989). In certain exceptional circumstances, the court may request the voluntary assistance of counsel pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1). Terrell v. Brewer, 935 F.2d 1015, 1017 (9th Cir. 1991); Wood v. Housewright, 900 F.2d 1332, 1335-36 (9th Cir. 1990). In the present case, the court does not find the required exceptional circumstances. Plaintiff's request for the appointment of counsel will therefore be denied.

Plaintiff has also requested an extension of the discovery cut-off date because he has been placed in administrative segregation and thus deprived of the necessary materials with which to pursue discovery.

The discovery cut-off date is February 27, 2009. Plaintiff does not suggest how long he will be in segregation and how long he will be deprived of materials. He has not shown good cause to extend the cut-off date.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Plaintiff's request for the appointment of counsel (docket no. 59) is denied; and

2. Plaintiff's request for an extension of the discovery cut-off date (docket no. 58) is denied without prejudice.

20090116

© 1992-2009 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.