Maynard v. United Services Automobile Association Federal Savings Bank
- Jeffrey White
- 4:21-cv-04519
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 2
In Joshua Maynard v. United Services Automobile Association Federal Savings Bank, Judge White denied counsel, granted more summary-judgment time, and vacated pretrial and trial dates.
Joshua Maynard, who is proceeding without a lawyer, and the schedule for the case.
What happened
In Joshua Maynard v. United Services Automobile Association Federal Savings Bank, Joshua Maynard asked the court to appoint a lawyer and extend case deadlines. The opinion does not identify the underlying claims.
The court found no exceptional circumstances requiring appointed counsel. It said Maynard was not likely to succeed on the merits and was able to explain his claims despite the legal issues. The court referred him to resources for people representing themselves, including the Pro Se Litigants Handbook and the Volunteer Legal Help Center.
Judge Jeffrey White denied the request to appoint counsel and granted Maynard’s request to continue the hearing on anticipated summary-judgment motions to March 6, 2026, at 9:00 a.m. The court vacated the pretrial and trial dates and said it would reset them if necessary when resolving the summary-judgment motion or motions.
The detailed version
- Maynard v. United Services Automobile Association Federal Savings Bank · No. 4:21-cv-04519
- Jeffrey White
- Dec. 2, 2025
Background
The court considered Joshua Maynard’s motions to appoint counsel and extend case dates. Maynard appeared without a lawyer. The opinion does not describe the underlying claims or the defendant’s position on these motions.
Request for appointed counsel
Under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1), a court may ask a lawyer to represent a person who cannot afford counsel. The court explained that a person generally has no constitutional right to a lawyer in a civil case unless losing the case could result in physical confinement. Appointment under the statute is reserved for “exceptional circumstances.”
The court evaluated the two factors identified in the opinion: the person’s likelihood of success on the merits and the person’s ability to explain the claims given the complexity of the legal issues. The court found that Maynard was not likely to succeed on the merits and was able to articulate his claims. It therefore found no exceptional circumstances and denied his request to appoint counsel.
Referral to legal-help resources
Although it denied appointed counsel, the court referred Maynard to the Handbook for Pro Se Litigants, which provides information for people proceeding without an attorney. The court also identified the Volunteer Legal Help Center as a source of information, advice, and basic legal help, while noting that the center cannot represent litigants as their lawyer.
Extension and case schedule
The court granted Maynard’s request for additional time to prepare for summary judgment. It continued the hearing on the anticipated summary-judgment motion or motions to March 6, 2026, at 9:00 a.m. The court vacated the pretrial and trial dates and stated that it would reset them if necessary in the order resolving the summary-judgment motion or motions.
Disposition
The court denied the motion to appoint counsel, referred Maynard to legal-services resources, and granted the request to extend the case dates. It did not state that the case was dismissed or decide the underlying claims.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.