Walters v. The City of New York

Filing 7

ORDER OF SERVICE: The Clerk of Court is directed to mail a copy of this order to Plaintiff, together with an information package. The Clerk of Court is also directed to electronically notify the New York City Department of Correction and the New York City Law Department of this order. The Court requests that Defendant City of New York waive service of summons. The Court denies Plaintiff's application for the Court to request pro bono counsel (ECF 4) without prejudice to renewal at a later time. The Court certifies under 28 U.S.C. 1915(a)(3) that any appeal from this order would not be taken in good faith, and therefore IFP status is denied for the purpose of an appeal. Cf. Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438, 444-45 (1962) (holding that an appellant demonstrates good faith when he seeks review of a nonfrivolous issue). The Court certifies, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1915(a)(3), that any appeal from this Order would not be taken in good faith, and therefore in forma pauperis status is denied for the purpose of an appeal. See Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438, 444-45 (1962). Waiver of Service due by 5/26/2021. (Signed by Judge Gregory H. Woods on 4/26/2021) (js) Transmission to Pro Se Assistants for processing.

USDC SDNY
DOCUMENT
ELECTRONICALLY FILED
DOC #:
DATE FILED: 4/26/2021

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
SHERON WALTERS,
Plaintiff,
-against-

1:21-cv-2880-GHW
ORDER OF SERVICE

THE CITY OF NEW YORK,
Defendant.
GREGORY H. WOODS, United States District Judge:

Plaintiff, currently detained in the George R. Vierno Center (GRVC) on Rikers Island,
brings this pro se action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging that Defendant failed to protect him
from contracting COVID-19. By order dated April 23, 2021, the Court granted Plaintiff’s request
to proceed without prepayment of fees, that is, in forma pauperis (IFP). 1
DISCUSSION
A.

Request to waive service of summons
The Clerk of Court is directed to notify the New York City Department of Correction and

the New York City Law Department of this order. The Court requests that the City of New York
waive service of summons.
B.

Application for pro bono counsel
The factors to be considered in ruling on an indigent litigant’s request for counsel include

the merits of the case, Plaintiff’s efforts to obtain a lawyer, and Plaintiff’s ability to gather the
facts and present the case if unassisted by counsel. See Cooper v. A. Sargenti Co., 877 F.2d 170,
172 (2d Cir. 1989); Hodge v. Police Officers, 802 F.2d 58, 60-62 (2d Cir. 1986). Of these, the

1

Prisoners are not exempt from paying the full filing fee even when they have been
granted permission to proceed IFP. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(1).

merits are “[t]he factor which command[s] the most attention.” Cooper, 877 F.2d at 172.
Because it is too early in the proceedings for the Court to assess the merits of the action,
Plaintiff’s motion for counsel is denied without prejudice to renewal at a later date.
CONCLUSION
The Clerk of Court is directed to mail a copy of this order to Plaintiff, together with an
information package.
The Clerk of Court is also directed to electronically notify the New York City
Department of Correction and the New York City Law Department of this order. The Court
requests that Defendant City of New York waive service of summons.
The Court denies Plaintiff’s application for the Court to request pro bono counsel (ECF
4) without prejudice to renewal at a later time.
The Court certifies under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal from this order would
not be taken in good faith, and therefore IFP status is denied for the purpose of an appeal. Cf.
Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438, 444-45 (1962) (holding that an appellant demonstrates
good faith when he seeks review of a nonfrivolous issue).
SO ORDERED.
Dated:

April 26, 2021
New York, New York
GREGORY H. WOODS
United States District Judge

2