Cepeda v. Griffin

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK RAMON CEPEDA, Plaintiff, ORDER

–against – 21-cv-4205 (ER) DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT LOUDEN, V.C.B.C.; DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT JONES, V.C.B.C.; DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT CARTER, V.C.B.C.; CAPTAIN WALDEN, V.C.B.C.; and TANISHA MILLS, Defendants. Ramos, D.J.: Ramon Cepeda, brought this pro se action on May 7, 2021 under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging that Defendants Linda Griffin, Warden, Vernon C. Bain Center (“V.C.B.C.”); Deputy Superintendent Louden, V.C.B.C.; Deputy Superintendent Jones, V.C.B.C.; Deputy Superintendent Carter, V.C.B.C.; Captain Walden, V.C.B.C.; and Tanisha Mills violated his Eighth and Fourteenth Amendment rights. Doc 2. At the time of the complaint Cepeda was a pre-trial detainee at V.C.B.C., on Rikers Island. Cepeda also filed an application for the Court to request that pro bono counsel represent him in this action. Doc. 32. Courts do not have the power to obligate attorneys to represent pro se litigants in civil cases. Mallard v. U.S. Dist. Ct. for the S. Dist. of Iowa, 490 U.S. 296, 310 (1989). Instead, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1), the Court may, in its discretion, order that the Pro Se Office request that an attorney represent an indigent litigant by placing the matter on a list that is circulated to attorneys who are members of the Court’s Pro Bono Panel. Palacio v. City of New York, 489 F. Supp. 2d 335, 344 (S.D.N.Y. 2007). The standards governing the appointment of counsel in pro se cases were set forth by the Court of Appeals in Hendricks v. Coughlin, 114 F.3d 390, 392 (2d Cir. 1997), Cooper v. A. Sargenti Co., 877 F.2d 170, 172 (2d Cir. 1989), and

Hodge v. Police Officers, 802 F.2d 58, 60–61 (2d Cir. 1986). The factors to be considered in ruling on an indigent litigant’s request for counsel include the merits of the case and Plaintiff’s ability to gather the facts and present the case if unassisted by counsel. See Dolan v. Connolly, 794 F.3d 290, 296 (2d Cir. 2015) (citing factors set forth in Hodge, 802 F.2d at 60–62). Of these, the Court must “first determine whether the indigent’s position seems likely to be of substance,” Hodge, 802 F.2d at 61, and, if this threshold requirement is met, then the Court must consider additional factors, including the pro se litigant’s “ability to handle the case without assistance,” Cooper, 877 F.2d at 172; accord Hendricks, 114 F.3d at 392. At this early stage in the proceedings, the Court is unable to conclude that Plaintiff’s claims are likely to have merit, although naturally that may change as the litigation progresses.

Accordingly, Plaintiff’s application for the appointment of pro bono counsel is DENIED without prejudice to possible renewal at a later stage in the case. Although the Court has denied Cepeda’s request for pro bono counsel, he may consider contacting the New York Legal Assistance Group’s (NYLAG) Clinic for Pro Se Litigants in the Southern District of New York, which is a free legal clinic staffed by attorneys and paralegals to assist those who are representing themselves in civil lawsuits in this court. The clinic is run by a private organization; it is not part of, or run by, the Court. It cannot accept filings on behalf of the Court, which must still be made by any pro se party through the Pro Se Intake Unit. To receive limited-scope assistance from the clinic, parties may complete the clinic’s intake form on their computer or phone at: https://tinyurl.com/NYLAG-ProSe-OI. If parties have questions regarding the form or they are unable to complete it, they may leave a voicemail at (212) 659-5190. The Clinic is open on weekdays from 10 a.m. to 4 p.m., except on days when the Court is closed. A copy of the flyer with details of the clinic is attached to this order. The Clerk of the Court is respectfully directed to terminate the motion, Doc. 32. It is SO ORDERED. Dated: July 5, 2023 New York, New York sili ik ‘ a □ Edgardo Ramos, U.S.D.J.

SD lee Pe ew Since 1990, NYLAG has provided free civil legal services New York ME Legal Assistance Group to New Yorkers who cannot afford private attorneys.

Free Legal Assistance for Self-Represented Civil Litigants in District Court for the Southern District Of New Yor|

NYLAG Legal Clinic for Pro Se Litigants in the Southern District of New York is a fre clinic staffed by attorneys, law students and paralegals to assist those who are themselves or planning to represent themselves in civil lawsuits in the outhern District of New York. The clinic does not provide full representation. The clinic, is not part of or run by the court, assists litigants with federal civil cases including involving civil rights, employment discrimination, labor law, social security benefit: and tax.

Contact the Clinic: (212) 659-6190 or complete our online intake form (found here: A staff member will contact you within a few days.

looking for assistance can also contact the clinic at the kiosk located across the hall the pro se clinic office in the courthouse.

this time, the clinic offers remote consultations only. Requests for in- appointments will be reviewed on a case-to-case basis. and Hours: Marshall United States Courthouse

Room LL22 40 Foley Square New York, NY 10007 (212) 659 6190 Open weekdays 10 a.m. — 4 p.m. Closed on federal and court holidays

ii □□□□ □