Garrick Harrington v. A. Scribner

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• explaining that “the prohibition against discrimination in § 1981 is co- extensive with the Equal Protection Clause”
• finding trial court did not abuse its 2 || discretion in failing to appoint counsel, noting “[d]espite his medical issues, [the 3 || plaintiff] articulated his claims well”
• noting penological interests still factor into the analysis of an equal protection claim
• noting that a 3 ||finding of exceptional circumstances requires the Court “to consider whether 4 ||there is a likelihood of success on the merits’ and whether the prisoner is 5 |}unable to articulate his claims in light of the complexity of the legal issues 6 ||involved.”’
• affirming a district court’s decision to deny appointing plaintiff counsel because he articulated his claims well, filed motions and substantive documents, and engaged with opposing counsel over the course of the entire proceeding
• \A prisoner's success on an equal protection claim is not dependent on whether the government met its obligations under the Eighth Amendment.\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).