Ford v. The Board of Education of The City School District of the City of NY

Opinion

DOCUMENT ELECTRONICALLY FILED UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DOC #: ae DATE FILED: 5/17/2021. BRIAN FORD Plaintiff 19-CV-6327 (JPC) (KHP) -against- ORDER ON APPLICATION FOR PRO BONO COUNSEL THE NEW YORK CITY BOARD OF EDUCATION (a/k/a THE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION) and CARMEN FARINA, IN HER OFFICIAL CAPACITY AS CHANCELLOR, Defendants. KATHARINE H. PARKER, United States Magistrate Judge: On April 27, 2021 Plaintiff Brian Ford submitted an application for the Court to request pro bono counsel on Plaintiff's behalf. (ECF No. 54.) Specifically, Plaintiff seeks pro bono counsel to assist him in discovery and to respond to the pending motion to dismiss filed by Defendants at ECF No. 55. Plaintiff made a similar request just a few months ago. (ECF No. 9.) The Court denied that initial request without prejudice to Plaintiff’s right to file another application after filing an amended complaint. (ECF No. 10.) It is still to early in the proceedings for the Court to assess the merits of this action and, therefore, the Court is compelled to deny Plaintiff’s request, once again, without prejudice. 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 merits are “[t]he factor which command[s] the most attention.” Cooper, 877 F.2d at 172. Because, as noted, it is too early in the proceedings for the Court to assess the merits of

the action, Plaintiff's motion for counsel (ECF No. 54) is denied without prejudice to refiling another application after the Court rules on Defendants’ motion to dismiss. SO ORDERED. Dated: New York, New York May 17, 2021 Kad hace fA. er KATHARINE H. PARKER United States Magistrate Judge