UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
November 17, 2009
TED DARNELL DANIELS PLAINTIFF,
O. ALVARADO, ET AL. DEFENDANTS.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Hon. Jeffrey T. Miller United States District Judge
ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION OF ORDER DENYING APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL
On or about November 16, 2009 the court received from Plaintiff a declaration requesting reconsideration of this court's August 7, 2009 order denying his motion for appointment of counsel. Reconsideration is generally appropriate where "the district court (1) is presented with newly discovered evidence, (2) clear error or the initial decision was manifestly unjust, or (3) if there is an intervening change in controlling law. . . . There may also be other, highly unusual circumstances warranting reconsideration." School Dist. N. 1J Multnomah Cty. v. ACandS, Inc., 5 F.3d 1255, 1263 (1993).
Here, the court denies the motion because Plaintiff fails to identify any newly discovered evidence, manifest injustice, or change in law. Consequently, the motion for reconsideration is denied.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
© 1992-2009 VersusLaw Inc.