Israel v. Salinas

Background

Akiva Israel, a state prisoner representing herself, filed a civil-rights complaint under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The court had previously granted and denied in part the defendants’ motion to dismiss based on exhaustion of administrative remedies. Several defendants were dismissed, and the remaining defendants were ordered to file a motion resolving the case within 90 days.

The order addressed several motions by Israel and the defendants. Israel sought appointed counsel for the limited purpose of representing her at a deposition and moved to continue discovery. The defendants moved to compel Israel to attend and meaningfully participate in the deposition after three unsuccessful attempts.

Appointment of Counsel

The court explained that it may ask a lawyer to represent a person without a lawyer only in “exceptional circumstances.” The court considers both the likelihood of success on the merits and the person’s ability to explain the claims without a lawyer in light of the legal issues’ complexity.

The court found that Israel had competently presented her claims, successfully opposed a motion to dismiss, sought discovery, and competently litigated another case in the same court. It also found that the deposition issues were not complex. The request for appointed counsel was denied.

Motion to Compel Deposition

The defendants said they had tried to depose Israel three times. Israel said she was ill during the first two attempts. During the third attempt, she refused to participate without her own counsel and stated that she believed the deposition was being conducted in bad faith or in a way that caused unreasonable oppression, noise, and embarrassment.

The motion to compel was granted. The court advised that the defendants were entitled to question Israel under oath about her claims and allegations. The defendants may schedule the deposition, and Israel is expected to attend and answer questions as required by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The court warned that failure to do so could result in sanctions, including barring issues or claims, barring evidence, or dismissing the case.

Other Rulings

The motions to appoint counsel, Docket Nos. 41, 42, and 47, were denied. Israel’s motions to continue discovery, Docket Nos. 43 and 44, were granted, and she may continue seeking discovery from the defendants. The defendants’ motion to compel Israel’s deposition, Docket No. 46, was granted, and the parties were directed to set a deposition date within 45 days of the order.

Israel had previously been instructed to provide more information needed to serve defendant Freeman. The court stated that the deadline had passed and Israel had not addressed the issue. Freeman was dismissed without prejudice for failure to serve under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(m).