Saddozai v. Bolanes
- Beth Freeman
- 5:18-cv-04511
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 2
In Saddozai v. Bolanes, Judge Freeman granted more time to oppose summary judgment but denied counsel appointment without prejudice.
Shikeb Saddozai received 28 additional days to oppose defendants’ summary-judgment motion, while his request for appointed counsel was denied without prejudice. Defendants received a deadline to reply after his opposition is filed.
What happened
Shikeb Saddozai, a state prisoner representing himself, sued prison personnel and medical staff under a federal civil-rights law. Defendants had filed a motion for summary judgment, and Saddozai sought more time to respond because of limited legal resources and a COVID-19-related lockdown.
The court granted Saddozai’s motion for a third extension of time. His opposition was due by August 21, 2020, and defendants’ reply was due 14 days after he filed his opposition.
Judge Freeman denied Saddozai’s third request for appointed counsel without prejudice, finding that he had not shown the exceptional circumstances required for appointment in this civil case. The order terminated the docket entry concerning these requests.
The detailed version
- Saddozai v. Bolanes · No. 5:18-cv-04511
- Beth Freeman
- Aug. 5, 2020
Background
Shikeb Saddozai, a state prisoner housed at Salinas Valley State Prison, brought this civil-rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against personnel and medical staff at Corcoran State Prison. The court had previously directed defendants to file a dispositive motion, and defendants filed a motion for summary judgment on January 30, 2020.
Saddozai moved for a third extension of time to oppose the summary-judgment motion. He cited lack of access to legal resources and a facility lockdown related to the COVID-19 pandemic. He also requested appointment of counsel, making this his third such request.
Rulings
The court granted the third extension of time. Saddozai’s opposition was due no later than August 21, 2020. Defendants’ reply was due no later than 14 days after Saddozai filed his opposition.
The court denied the request for appointment of counsel without prejudice. It explained that there is generally no constitutional right to counsel in a civil case unless the litigant may lose physical liberty, and that appointment under 28 U.S.C. § 1915 is reserved for exceptional circumstances. The court found that Saddozai’s asserted grounds, including the pandemic-related circumstances, did not establish exceptional circumstances at that time.
Effect of the Order
The order terminated Docket No. 52. It did not decide the pending summary-judgment motion or the underlying civil-rights claims.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.