Brock v. CVS Corporation

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT | RLECTRO?MCALLY FILED | SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK i POC □ □□□ neem nanan annnnnnnnnnX onsen. 6fE(20aAX |) TERRELL K. BROCK, : GSTS Sy eR Plaintiff, : ORDER CVS CORPORATION; MANAGER LEO; CITY OF WHITE PLAINS; and JOHN DOE : 22 CV 4014 (VB) WP PD OFFICERS, : Defendants. : i te a tS A et ttt to IK Plaintiff, who is incarcerated and proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, moves for appointment of counsel. (Doc. #10). The motion is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE to renewal. The Court has considered the type and complexity of this case, the merits of plaintiffs claims, and plaintiff's ability to present the case. The Court, in its discretion, does not find exceptional circumstances in plaintiff's case warranting the appointment of counsel at this time. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1); Cooper v. A. Sargenti Co., 877 F.2d 170, 172 (2d Cir. 1989). Accordingly, plaintiff's request is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE for renewal at an appropriate time in the future. 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). Chambers will mail a copy of this Order to plaintiff at the address on the docket. Dated: June 8, 2022 White Plains, NY SO ORDERED:

Vincent L. Briccetti United States District Judge