The 5th, 8th, & Federal Circuits think you can appeal immediately; the 3rd and 9th Circuits think you can do so for some cases but not others; the 1st, 2nd, 4th, 6th, 7th, 10th, 11th, & D.C. Circuits think you can't. I have the unfortunate luck of being in two of the latter group.

Right now, my lawyers are appealing the question whether or not I get to appeal immediately. Yes, it's very meta.

Case law

Collateral appeal doctrine: Cohen v. Beneficial Industrial Loan Corp., 337 U.S. 541, 546 (1949)

Circuit split re whether denial of counsel is collaterally appealable:

• Pro (3rd, 5th, 8th, 9th, & Federal Circuits):
  • Ray v. Robinson, 640 F.2d 474 (3d Cir. 1981)
  • Spanos v. Penn Central Transportation Co., 470 F.2d 806, 807 n. 3 (3d Cir. 1972) (denial of appointed counsel in Title VII case immediately appealable)
  • Jackson v. Dallas Police Dep't, 811 F.2d 260, 261 (5th Cir. 1986)
  • Robbins v. Maggio, 750 F.2d 405 (5th Cir. 1985) (2-1); dissent at 414-18
    
    but see Campanioni v. Barr, 962 F. 2d 461 (5th Cir. 1992) (award of fees due to appointment of CJA counsel not immediately appealable)
  • Caston v. Sears, Roebuck & Co., 556 F.2d 1305, 1308 (5th Cir. 1977) (denial of appointed counsel in § 1983 case is immediately appealable)
    
    but see Marler v. Adonis, 997 F.2d 1141, 1143 (5th Cir. 1993) (not extending Caston to products liability cases)
    adopted by 11th Cir. when splitting from 5th Cir., Bonner v. City of Prichard, 661 F.2d 1206, 1209 (11th Cir. 1981) (en banc)
  • Slaughter v. City of Maplewood, 731 F.2d 587, 588 (8th Cir. 1984)
    
    but see Ward v. Smith, 721 F.3d 940 (8th Cir. 2013) (per curiam, 2-1); dissent at 943-45
    and Pena-Calleja v. Ring, 720 F.3d 988, 989 (8th Cir. 2013) (not extending Slaughter to habeas cases)
  • Bradshaw v. Zoological Society, 662 F.2d 1301 (9th Cir. 1981) (2-1); dissent at 1320-25
  • Rincon Band of Mission Indians v. Escondido Mut. Wat. Co., 459 F. 2d 1082 (9th Cir. 1972) (denial of US Attorney representation for Indians under 25 U.S.C. § 175 immediately appealable)
  • Lariscey v. United States, 861 F.2d 1267, 1269 (Fed. Cir. 1988) (2-1 on jurisdictional question) (denial of appointed IFP counsel immediately appealable); concurrence in result at 1271-73 (denial of counsel not "effectively unreviewable on appeal from final judgment"; Claims Court not Article III court, so lacks authority under IFP statute), cert. denied, 509 U.S. 905 (1993)
• Con (1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 6th, 7th, 10th, 11th, & D.C. Circuits):
  • Appleby v. Meachum, 696 F.2d 145, 146-47 (1st Cir. 1983) (per curiam) (order denying appointed counsel is subject to revision)
    Sai v TSA, No. 15-2526 (1st Cir. Dec. 7, 2016) (per curiam) (same)
  • Welch v. Smith, 810 F.2d 40 (2d Cir. 1987), cert. denied, 484 U.S. 903 (dissent from denial of cert, J. White & Blackmun)
  • Levine v. American Export Industries, Inc., 473 F. 2d 1008 (2d Cir. 1973) (potential conflict of interest in appointed class counsel not immediately appealable)
  • Miller v. Pleasure, 425 F.2d 1205 (2d Cir. 1970) (per curiam), cert. denied, 400 U.S. 880
    overruling Miller v. Pleasure, 296 F.2d 283, 283 (2d Cir. 1961), cert. denied, 370 U.S. 964 (1962) (same case, different panel)
    but see United States v. Harris, 707 F. 2d 653 (2d. Cir. 1983) (order terminating CJA counsel immediately appealable)
  • Smith-Bey v. Petsock, 741 F.2d 22 (3d Cir. 1984) (2-1) (denial of appointed IFP counsel not immediately appealable); dissent at 26
  • Miller v. Simmons, 814 F.2d 962, 967 (4th Cir. 1987), cert. denied, 484 U.S. 903 (dissent from denial of cert, J. White & Blackmun)
    
    same, United States v. Hutto, No. 90-7070, 914 F.2d 249 (4th Cir., Sept 18, 1990) (unpublished, per curiam)
    
  • Henry v. City of Detroit Manpower Dep’t, 763 F.2d 757, 764 (6th Cir. 1985) (en banc, 8-1-4) (orders denying appointed counsel are presumptively tentative); concurrence in result at 764-765 ("conclusive" prong of Cohen test satisfied); dissent at 765-72; dissent at 772, cert. denied, 474 U.S. 1036 (dissent from denial of cert, J. White & Blackmun)
  • Randle v. Victor Welding Supply Co., 664 F.2d 1064, 1066-67 (7th Cir. 1981) (per curiam, 2-1); dissent at 1067-69
  • Wilborn v. Escalderon, 789 F.2d 1328, 1330 fn. 2 (9th Cir. 1986) (distinguishing denials of appointed counsel in Title VII cases from denials under § 1915 for purposes of immediate appealability)
  • Weygandt v. Look, 718 F.2d 952, 953-54 (9th Cir. 1983) (not extending Bradshaw to habeas cases)
  • Cotner v. Mason, 657 F.2d 1390, 1392 (10th Cir. 1981) (per curiam)
  • Hodges v. Department of Corrections, State of Ga., 895 F. 2d 1360 (11th Cir. 1990) (per curiam) (Holt implicitly overruled Caston; no basis for distinguishing denial of counsel in § 1983 cases from Title VII cases)
  • Holt v. Ford, 862 F.2d 850 (11th Cir. 1989) (en banc, 8-4) (denial of appointed counsel in § 1915 not immediately reviewable); dissent at 855-59
  • Ficken v. Alvarez, 146 F.3d 978, 980-83 (D.C. Cir. 1988)

Other cases:

• Sears, Roebuck & Co. v. Charles W. Sears Real Estate, Inc., 865 F.2d 22, 23 (2d Cir. 1988)
• Richardson-Merrell Inc. v. Koller, 472 U.S. 424 (1985) (7-1) (order disqualifying counsel in civil case not immediately appealable); dissent at 442-44
• Flanagan v. United States, 465 U.S. 259 (1984) (order disqualifying counsel in criminal case not immediately appealable)
• Ponce-Bran v. Trustees of Cal. State University, 48 Cal. App. 4th 1656, 1662 (CA. Ct. App. 3rd Dist. 1996) (under CA law, denial of counsel is collateral and final, but doesn't order payment or injunction, so is not appealable)
• Duttry v. Talkish, 576 A. 2d 53 (Pa. 1990) (under PA law, appointment of counsel in case seeking custody not immediately appealable)

Law reviews:

• Brad D. Feldman, Note, An Appeal for Immediate Appealability: Applying the Collateral Order Doctrine to Orders Denying Appointed Counsel in Civil Rights Cases, 99 Geo. L.J. 1717, 1739–44 (2011)
• Kimberly A. Owens, Right to Counsel - The Third Circuit Delivers Indigent Civil Litigants from Exceptional Circumstances, 39 Vill. L. Rev. 1163 (1994)
• Jeffery Hanslick, Decisions Denying the Appointment of Counsel and the Final Judgment Rule in Civil Rights Litigation, 86 Nw. L. Rev. 782, 801-06 (1992)
• Appealability, under the Collateral Order Doctrine, of Orders Denying Motions for Appointment of Counsel in Federal Civil Litigation after Richardson-Merrell, Inc. v. Koller, 3 Touro L. Rev. 229 (1986-1987)
• James P. Weygandt, Note, Motions for Appointment of Counsel and the Collateral Order Doctrine, 83 Mich. L. Rev. 1547-70 (1985)
• Appealability of Federal Court Order Denying Motion for Appointment of Counsel for Indigent Party, 67 A.L.R. Fed. 925 (1984)
• Nicolas Swerdloff, Note, Denial of a Pro Se Litigant's Motion to Appoint Counsel: The Preclusive Effect of Refusing Immediate Review, 50 Fordham L. Rev. 1399 (1982)

Appointment of counsel statutes:

• 18 U.S.C. § 3006A(a)(2)(B) (Criminal Justice Act, criminal defendants)
• 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e) (in forma pauperis, civil cases)
• 42 U.S.C. § 12188(a)(1) (disability discrimination in public accommodations operated by private entities)
• 42 U.S.C. § 2000a-3(a) (general disability discrimination)
• 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5(f) (employment disability discrimination)
• 25 U.S.C. § 175 (Indian reservation cases)
• 25 U.S.C. § 1912(b) (Indian child custody cases)
• 52 U.S.C. § 10101(f), formerly 42 U.S.C. § 1971(f) (Voting Rights Act defendants)
• FRCP 23(g)(1) (certified class action), (g)(3) (interim counsel for putative class action)