Batista v. New York Police Department et al

Filing 97

ORDER: Accordingly, the Court will proceed to set this case for trial. After considering the factors set forth in Hodge v. Police Officers, the Court finds that the continued appointment of pro bono counsel in this case is justified. See 802 F.2d 5 8, 61-62 (2d Cir. 1986). This case will be set for trial, and therefore the appointment of counsel is crucial to, inter alia, Plaintiff's ability to present the case at trial and to conduct cross-examination [that] will be the major proof pre sented to the fact finder. Id. at 61. In this case, representation would lead to a quicker and more just result by sharpening the issues and shaping examination. Id. Therefore, Plaintiff's current pro bono counsel shall inform the Court on or by February 25, 2021, whether they will continue to represent Plaintiff. After the issue of pro bono counsel isresolved, the Court will set the matter down for trial. (Signed by Judge Katherine Polk Failla on 2/11/2021) (nb)

Case 1:17-cv-01994-KPF Document 97 Filed 02/11/21 Page 1 of 2

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
SHAMIR BATISTA,
Plaintiff,
-v.-

17 Civ. 1994 (KPF)

DETECTIVE MICHAEL LECLAIR, Shield No.
5045,

ORDER

Defendant.
KATHERINE POLK FAILLA, District Judge:
By Order dated July 8, 2020, the Court granted Plaintiff’s request for pro
bono counsel for the limited purpose of representing Plaintiff in a settlement
conference. (Dkt. #91). On October 26, 2020, pro bono counsel appeared on
behalf of Plaintiff. (Dkt. #93-94). On February 11, 2021, the Court was
informed that the parties were unable to reach a settlement. Accordingly, the
Court will proceed to set this case for trial.
After considering the factors set forth in Hodge v. Police Officers, the
Court finds that the continued appointment of pro bono counsel in this case is
justified. See 802 F.2d 58, 61-62 (2d Cir. 1986). This case will be set for trial,
and therefore the appointment of counsel is crucial to, inter alia, Plaintiff’s
“ability to present the case” at trial and to conduct “cross-examination [that]
will be the major proof presented to the fact finder.” Id. at 61. In this case,
representation would “lead to a quicker and more just result by sharpening the
issues and shaping examination.” Id. Therefore, Plaintiff’s current pro bono
counsel shall inform the Court on or by February 25, 2021, whether they will

Case 1:17-cv-01994-KPF Document 97 Filed 02/11/21 Page 2 of 2

continue to represent Plaintiff. After the issue of pro bono counsel is
resolved, the Court will set the matter down for trial.
SO ORDERED.
Dated:

February 11, 2021
New York, New York

__________________________________
KATHERINE POLK FAILLA
United States District Judge

2