Legal Opinion

(PC) Arellano v. CDCR

District Court, E.D. California

Decided February 2, 2021No. 1:20-cv-00011Unknown

1Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 MARCOS ARELLANO, ) Case No.: 1:20-cv-00011-SAB (PC) ) 12 Plaintiff, ) ) ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION 13 v. ) FOR APPOINMENT OF COUNSEL, WITHOUT PREJUDICE 14 CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT ) ) (ECF No. 29) 15 CORRECTIONS AND REHABILITATION, ) ) 16 Defendant. ) ) 17 ) 18 Plaintiff Marcos Arellano is appearing pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action 19 pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. 20 Currently before the Court is Plaintiff’s motion for appointment of counsel, filed February 1, 21 2021. Plaintiff…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Frederick C. Wilborn v. Antonio Escalderon and Ruth RushenCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1986
  2. Mallard v. United States Dist. Court for Southern Dist. of IowaSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
  3. Lee A. Rand v. James Rowland Nadim Khoury, M.D. William Bunnell Roy Lee Johnson Leo R. EstesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1997

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API