Anderson v. County of Monroe et al
Filing
52
DECISION & ORDER granting 51 Motion to Appoint Counsel. Appointed Steven V. Modica, Esq. of Modica & Associates, PLLC, 2430 Ridgeway Avenue, Rochester, NY 14626, pro bono, to represent Connie Anderson. The Clerk of the Court is directed t o copy that portion of the file in this matter that is not currently available through PACER on the Court's Case Management/Electronic Case Management System and send it to Steven V. Modica, together with a copy of this order and the Guidelines Governing Reimbursement from the District Court Fund of Expenses Incurred by Court Appointed Counsel. The Chief Judge of the Court will also issue an Order directing PACER to waive its fees so pro bono counsel can access and print at no cost t o him or his firm any other documents filed herein that he may need. Plaintiff's attorney is directd to contact the Court by 8/6/2015, to request a date for a status conference and to discuss further proceedings in the case. Signed by Hon. Marian W. Payson on 7/24/2015. Copy of order mailed to Connie Anderson on 7/24/2015. (KAH) -CLERK TO FOLLOW UP-
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
_______________________________________
CONNIE ANDERSON,
DECISION & ORDER
Plaintiff,
12-CV-6093T
v.
COUNTY OF MONROE, et al.,
Defendants.
_______________________________________
On February 24, 2012, plaintiff Connie Anderson (“plaintiff”) filed a complaint
pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging that the defendants violated her constitutional rights while
she was incarcerated at the Monroe County Jail. (Docket # 1). Currently before this Court is
plaintiffs’ request for appointment of counsel. (Docket # 51).
It is well-settled that there is no constitutional right to appointed counsel in civil
cases. Although the court may appoint counsel to assist indigent litigants pursuant to 28 U.S.C.
§ 1915(e), see, e.g., Sears, Roebuck and Co. v. Charles W. Sears Real Estate, Inc., 865 F.2d 22,
23 (2d Cir. 1988), such assignment of counsel is clearly within the judge’s discretion. In re
Martin-Trigona, 737 F.2d 1254 (2d Cir. 1984). The factors to be considered in deciding whether
or not to assign counsel include the following:
1.
Whether the indigent’s claims seem likely to be of
substance;
2.
Whether the indigent is able to investigate the crucial facts
concerning his claim;
3.
Whether conflicting evidence implicating the need for
cross-examination will be the major proof presented to the
fact finder;
4.
Whether the legal issues involved are complex; and
5.
Whether there are any special reasons why appointment of
counsel would be more likely to lead to a just
determination.
Hendricks v. Coughlin, 114 F.3d 390, 392 (2d Cir. 1997); see also Hodge v. Police Officers, 802
F.2d 58 (2d Cir. 1986).
The court must consider the issue of appointment carefully, of course, because
“every assignment of a volunteer lawyer to an undeserving client deprives society of a volunteer
lawyer available for a deserving cause.” Cooper v. A. Sargenti Co., Inc., 877 F.2d 170, 172 (2d
Cir. 1989). With this understanding, the Court has reviewed the facts presented herein in light of
the factors required by law and finds that the appointment of counsel is appropriate in this
matter.
Accordingly, plaintiffs’ request for appointment of counsel (Docket # 51) is
GRANTED. The Court hereby assigns Steven V. Modica, Esq. of Modica & Associates, PLLC,
2430 Ridgeway Avenue, Rochester, New York 14626, pro bono, to faithfully and diligently
represent plaintiff in this case.
The Clerk of the Court is directed to copy that portion of the file in this matter
that is not currently available through PACER on the Court’s Case Management/Electronic Case
Management System and send it to Steven V. Modica, together with a copy of this order and the
Guidelines Governing Reimbursement from the District Court Fund of Expenses Incurred by
Court Appointed Counsel.1 The Chief Judge of the Court will also issue an Order directing
1
This information and the forms are also available on the Court’s web site at the Attorney Information link from the
home page located at: http://www.nywd.uscourts.gov//pro-bono-program-district-court-fund.
2
PACER to waive its fees so pro bono counsel can access and print at no cost to him or his firm
any other documents filed herein that he may need. Plaintiff’s attorney is directed to contact the
Court by August 6, 2015, to request a date for a status conference and to discuss further
proceedings in the case.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
s/Marian W. Payson
MARIAN W. PAYSON
United States Magistrate Judge
Dated: Rochester, New York
July 24, 2015
3
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?