Lopez v. Lee

Summary

The United States District Court for the Northern District of California granted nunc pro tunc extensions concerning briefing on a motion to compel and granted Defendants’ request to extend the dispositive-motion deadline. The court denied Plaintiff’s renewed request for appointment of counsel, granted his request to attend future depositions by videoconference, and reset the discovery and dispositive-motion briefing schedule.

Holdings

1. An indigent civil litigant is entitled to appointed counsel only in exceptional circumstances, evaluated by considering both the likelihood of success on the merits and the litigant's ability to articulate claims pro se in light of the complexity of the legal issues. Plaintiff did not establish exceptional circumstances.
2. Upon a showing of good cause, the court may grant nunc pro tunc extensions of time for filing opposition, reply, and dispositive-motion papers.
3. Plaintiff was permitted to attend any depositions taken by defendants, and defendants were ordered to provide timely notice and coordinate with the institution to facilitate his attendance by videoconference.

Questions Presented

1. Whether good cause supported extensions of time for defendants to oppose plaintiff's second motion to compel, for plaintiff to file a reply, and for defendants to file a dispositive motion.
2. Whether plaintiff had shown exceptional circumstances warranting appointment of counsel under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1).
3. Whether plaintiff should be permitted to attend depositions taken by defendants and receive related logistical assistance.

Disposition

other