Gaudino v. 2400-2410 Davidson Ave. HDFC
Filing
13
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER re: 3 MOTION to Appoint Counsel filed by Albert Gaudino. The plaintiff's application to appoint counsel is denied without prejudice for failure to make the required showing. The Court of Appeals for the Second Circ uit has articulated factors that should guide the Courts discretion to appoint counsel to represent an indigent civil litigant under 28 U.S.C. § 1915. The plaintiff has not made such a showing. The plaintiff's application for the Court to appoint counsel is therefore denied without prejudice for failure to make the required showing at this time. (Signed by Judge John G. Koeltl on 6/26/2013) (ft)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
────────────────────────────────────
ALBERT GAUDINO,
Petitioner,
- against -
13 Civ. 2925 (JGK)
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND
ORDER
2400-2410 DAVISON AVE. HDFC,
Respondent.
────────────────────────────────────
JOHN G. KOELTL, District Judge:
The plaintiff’s application to appoint counsel is denied
without prejudice for failure to make the required showing.
The
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit has articulated factors
that should guide the Court’s discretion to appoint counsel to
represent an indigent civil litigant under 28 U.S.C. § 1915.
See Hodge v. Police Officers, 802 F.2d 58, 61-62 (2d Cir. 1986);
Jackson v. Moscicki, No. 99 Civ. 2427 (JGK), 2000 WL 511642, at
*4 (S.D.N.Y. Apr. 27, 2000).
For the Court to order the
appointment of counsel, the plaintiff must, as a threshold
matter, demonstrate that the claim has substance or a likelihood
of success on the merits.
See Hodge, 802 F.2d at 60-61.
Only
then can the Court consider the other factors appropriate to
determination of whether counsel should be appointed:
“plaintiff’s ability to obtain representation independently, and
[her] ability to handle the case without assistance in the light
of the required factual investigation, the complexity of the
legal issues, and the need for expertly conducted crossexamination to test veracity.”
Cooper v. A. Sargenti Co., Inc.,
877 F.2d 170, 172 (2d Cir. 1989).
such a showing.
The plaintiff has not made
The plaintiff’s application for the Court to
appoint counsel is therefore denied without prejudice for
failure to make the required showing at this time.
SO ORDERED.
Dated:
New York, New York
June 26, 2013
____________/s/______________
John G. Koeltl
United States District Judge
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?