Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

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

Lamon Stroud v. Pruitt

United States District Court, E.D. California

January 8, 2020

MALCOLM TANDY LAMON STROUD, Plaintiff,
v.
PRUITT, et al., Defendants.

         ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANTS' MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT, DENYING PLAINTIFF'S RENEWED MOTION FOR APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL, AND DENYING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR ORDER REQUIRING DEFENDANTS TO CONSIDER PLAINTIFF'S SETTLEMENT OFFER (ECF NO. 30)

          Barbara A. McAuliffe UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

         Plaintiff Malcolm Tandy Lamon Stroud is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302.

         I. Introduction

         This action is currently proceeding on Plaintiff's first amended complaint against Defendant Pruitt for sexual abuse in violation of the Eighth Amendment and against Defendants Pruitt and Smith for discrimination in violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. (ECF No. 19.)

         On December 9, 2019, Defendants Pruitt and Smith filed a motion for summary judgment for failure to exhaust administrative remedies. (ECF No. 29.)

         Currently before the Court is Plaintiff's motion for an extension of time to file an opposition to Defendants' motion for summary judgment, Plaintiff's renewed motion for appointment of counsel, and Plaintiff's motion for an order requiring Defendants to consider Plaintiff's settlement offer, filed on January 6, 2020. (ECF No. 30.)

         II. Motion for Extension of Time to File Second Amended Complaint

         Plaintiff requests that this Court grant him an extension of time to file his opposition to Defendants' motion for summary judgment. (ECF No. 30.) Plaintiff asserts that he needs additional time to adequately prepare his opposition because he has been unable to get access to the prison law library due to the numbers of other inmates also wanting access and the library's limited schedule during the holiday season. (Id.)

         Having considered the request, the Court finds that Plaintiff has demonstrated good cause for an extension of time. Fed.R.Civ.P. 6(b). Therefore, Plaintiff's motion for an extension of time to file his opposition to Defendants' summary judgment motion is granted. Plaintiff shall file his opposition to Defendants' motion for summary judgment, if any, no later than thirty (30) days from the date of service of this order.

         III. Motion for Appointment of Counsel

         Plaintiff does not have a constitutional right to appointed counsel in this action, Rand v. Rowland, 113 F.3d 1520, 1525 (9th Cir. 1997), and the court cannot require any attorney to represent Plaintiff pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1), Mallard v. United States District Court for the Southern District of Iowa, 490 U.S. 296, 298 (1989). Nevertheless, in certain exceptional circumstances, the court may request the voluntary assistance of counsel pursuant to § 1915(e)(1). Rand, 113 F.3d at 1525.

         Without a reasonable method of securing and compensating counsel, the Court will seek volunteer counsel only in the most serious and exceptional cases. In determining whether “exceptional circumstances exist, the district court must evaluate both the likelihood of success on the merits [and] the ability of the [plaintiff] to articulate his claims pro se in light of the complexity of the legal issues involved.” Id. (internal quotation marks and citations omitted). “Neither of these considerations is dispositive and instead must be viewed together.” Palmer v. Valdez, 560 F.3d 965, 970 (9th Cir. 2009). The burden of demonstrating exceptional circumstances is on the plaintiff. Id.

         Here, Plaintiff contends that the Court should appoint counsel to represent Plaintiff in this action because Plaintiff is an indigent layperson at law, who suffers from post-traumatic stress disorder. Specifically, Plaintiff asserts that they have a hard time with concentrating, ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

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