Johnson v. City of New York

District Court, S.D. New York·Decided July 8, 2020·No. 1:20-cv-03083·Unknown

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK VANDYKE JOHNSON, Plaintiff, 20-CV-3083 (LLS) -against- ORDER CITY OF NEW YORK, ET AL., Defendants. LOUIS L. STANTON, United States District Judge: Plaintiff proceeds pro se and in forma pauperis in this action. By order dated May 5, 2020, the Court directed Plaintiff to amend his complaint to cure its deficiencies. (ECF No. 4). Plaintiff then submitted applications seeking pro bono counsel (ECF No. 5), reconsideration of the order to amend (ECF No. 6), and an extension of time to amend his complaint (ECF No. 7).1 DISCUSSION The factors to be considered in ruling on an indigent plaintiff’s motion for pro bono counsel include the merits of the case, the plaintiff’s efforts to obtain a lawyer, and the 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 [that] command[s] the most attention.” Cooper, 877 F.2d at 172. And even if a court does believe that a litigant should have a free lawyer, under the in forma pauperis statute, a court has no authority to “appoint” counsel, but instead, may only “request” that an attorney volunteer to represent a litigant. Mallard v. U.S. Dist. Court for the S. Dist. of Iowa, 490 U.S. 296, 301-10 (1989).

1 Plaintiff also submitted a change of address. (ECF No. 8). First, the Court notes that Plaintiff appears able to adequately present his case. Moreover, Plaintiff indicates that he has had some assistance by telephone from the New York Legal Assistance Group. Because it is too early in the proceedings for the Court to assess the merits of this action, the Court denies Plaintiff’s motion for pro bono counsel without prejudice to

Plaintiff’s filing a new application for the Court to request pro bono counsel at a later date. The Court denies Plaintiff’s request to reconsider the order directing him to amend his complaint, as Plaintiff has not provided any sufficient reason for the Court to reconsider its order. The Court grants Plaintiff’s request for an extension of time until August 5, 2020, to amend his complaint. No further extensions will be granted. In light of the current global health crisis, parties proceeding pro se are encouraged to submit all filings by email to Temporary_Pro_Se_Filing@nysd.uscourts.gov. Pro se parties who are unable to use email may submit documents by regular mail or in person at the drop box located at the U.S. Courthouses in Manhattan (500 Pearl Street) and White Plains (300 Quarropas Street). For more information, including instructions on submitting documents by

email, please visit the Court’s website at nysd.uscourts.gov. Pro se parties also are encouraged to consent to receive all court documents electronically. A consent to electronic service form is available on the Court’s website. CONCLUSION The Clerk of Court is directed to mail a copy of this order to Plaintiff and note service on the docket. The Court denies Plaintiff’s motion for pro bono counsel without prejudice and denies his request to reconsider the order directing him to amend his complaint. The Court grants Plaintiff’s request for an extension of time until August 5, 2020, to amend his complaint. An amended complaint form is attached to this order. 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 in forma pauperis 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: July 7, 2020 New York, New York Louis L. Stanton US.D.J.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

CVE TT a (clu ber if has b Write the full name of each plaintiff. evened) me eNews

against AMENDED

□ COMPLAINT ee Do you want a jury trial? LlYes ULINo

Write the full name of each defendant. If you need more space, please write “see attached” in the space above and attach an additional sheet of paper with the full list of names. The names listed above must be identical to those contained in Section Il.

NOTICE The public can access electronic court files. For privacy and security reasons, papers filed with the court should therefore not contain: an individual’s full social security number or full birth date; the full name of a person known to be a minor; or a complete financial account number. A filing may include only: the last four digits of a social security number; the year of an individual’s birth; a minor’s initials; and the last four digits of a financial account number. See Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 5.2.

Rev. 2/10/17

I. BASIS FOR JURISDICTION Federal courts are courts of limited jurisdiction (limited power). Generally, only two types of cases can be heard in federal court: cases involving a federal question and cases involving diversity of citizenship of the parties. Under 28 U.S.C. § 1331, a case arising under the United States Constitution or federal laws or treaties is a federal question case. Under 28 U.S.C. § 1332, a case in which a citizen of one State sues a citizen of another State or nation, and the amount in controversy is more than $75,000, is a diversity case. In a diversity case, no defendant may be a citizen of the same State as any plaintiff. What is the basis for federal-court jurisdiction in your case? [] Federal Question L] Diversity of Citizenship A. If you checked Federal Question Which of your federal constitutional or federal statutory rights have been violated?

B. If you checked Diversity of Citizenship 1. Citizenship of the parties Of what State is each party a citizen? The plaintiff , ,is a citizen of the State of (Plaintiff's name)

(State in which the person resides and intends to remain.) or, if not lawfully admitted for permanent residence in the United States, a citizen or subject of the foreign state of

If more than one plaintiff is named in the complaint, attach additional pages providing information for each additional plaintiff.

Page 2

If the defendant is an individual:

The defendant, , is a citizen of the State of (Defendant’s name)

or, if not lawfully admitted for permanent residence in the United States, a citizen or subject of the foreign state of . If the defendant is a corporation: The defendant, , is incorporated under the laws of the State of and has its principal place of business in the State of or is incorporated under the laws of (foreign state) and has its principal place of business in . If more than one defendant is named in the complaint, attach additional pages providing information for each additional defendant.

II. PARTIES A. Plaintiff Information Provide the following information for each plaintiff named in the complaint. Attach additional pages if needed.

First Name Middle Initial Last Name

Street Address

County, City State Zip Code

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Johnson v. City of New York, (S.D.N.Y. 2020).

Johnson v. City of New York (Johnson v. City of New York) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Coppedge v. United States
369 U.S. 438 (Supreme Court, 1962)
Bennie Cooper v. A. Sargenti Co., Inc.
877 F.2d 170 (Second Circuit, 1989)