Keen v. Cross

Summary

The United States District Court for the Eastern District of California denied Brandon Keen’s motion to obtain video evidence and motion for appointment of counsel in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action. The court held that discovery requests must be served on the opposing parties rather than filed with the court and found that Keen had not demonstrated exceptional circumstances warranting appointed counsel.

Holdings

1. Plaintiff's motion to obtain video evidence was denied because discovery requests must be served on the parties, and filing the requests with the court was procedurally improper where no local rule required court review.
2. Plaintiff failed to demonstrate exceptional circumstances warranting appointment of counsel, so the motion for appointment of counsel was denied.

Questions Presented

1. Whether plaintiff could obtain video evidence by filing a discovery request with the court rather than serving the request on defendants.
2. Whether plaintiff demonstrated exceptional circumstances warranting appointment of counsel in his prisoner § 1983 action.

Disposition

other