Kominiak v. San Diego County et al

3:25-cv-03113Casd24 de mar. de 2026

Abrir fonte

Texto completo

1
25cv3113-LL-DEB
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
BRYAN KOMINIAK,
Plaintiff,
v.
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, ET AL.,
Defendants.
Case No.: 25cv3113-LL-DEB
ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR
APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL
[ECF No. 6];
ORDER DENYING AS MOOT
MOTION TO PROCEED IN FORMA
PAUPERIS [ECF No. 7]
Pending before the Court is a Motion for Appointment of Counsel by pro se Plaintiff,
Bryan Kominiak. ECF No. 6. There is no constitutional right to counsel in a civil case, and
appointment of counsel under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1) is within “the sound discretion of the
trial court and is granted only in exceptional circumstances.” Agyeman v. Corr. Corp. of
America, 390 F.3d 1101, 1103 (9th Cir. 2004); Terrell v. Brewer, 935 F.2d 1015, 1017 (9th
Cir. 1991) (noting that only “exceptional circumstances” support such a discretionary
appointment). Exceptional circumstances exist where there is cumulative showing of both
a likelihood of success on the merits and an inability of the pro se litigant to articulate his
claims in light of their legal complexity. Palmer v. Valdez, 560 F.3d 965, 970 (9th Cir.
2009).
Case 3:25-cv-03113-LL-DEB Document 15 Filed 03/24/26 PageID.<pageID> Page
1 of 2
2
25cv3113-LL-DEB
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
The Court finds that Plaintiff is capable of legibly articulating the facts and
circumstances relevant to his claims, which are not exceptionally legally complex.
Accordingly, the Court DENIES Plaintiff’s Motion for Appointment of Counsel.
Additionally, Plaintiff filed a Motion to Proceed In Forma Pauperis, in which
Plaintiff seeks to proceed in this case without payment of fees. ECF No. 7. However, upon
removal of this action from state court to federal court by the Defendants, they paid the
requisite filing fee of $405 dollars as evidenced by receipt number ACASDC-20475594.
See ECF No. 1. Accordingly, Plaintiff’s Motion to Proceed In Forma Pauperis is DENIED
AS MOOT as the filing fee has already been paid.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: March 24, 2026
Case 3:25-cv-03113-LL-DEB Document 15 Filed 03/24/26 PageID.<pageID> Page
2 of 2

Continue sua pesquisa no ChatGPT ou Claude

Conecte o Omnilex para pesquisar o corpus jurídico pelo seu assistente de IA.