Opinion
00 CV 4453.
March 14, 2001
SUSAN GOODMAN, Brooklyn, New York, plaintiff pro se.
ZACHARY W. CARTER, United States Attorney, (Claire S. Kedeshian, of counsel) Brooklyn, New York, for respondent.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Plaintiff brought this proceeding to review a final determination of the Commissioner of Social Security denying plaintiff supplemental security income benefits. Plaintiff now moves for appointment of counsel.
Cooper v. A. Sargenti Co., 877 F.2d 170 (2d Cir. 1989), articulates the factors the court must consider before appointing counsel for an indigent litigant: (1) whether the indigent's position seems likely to be of substance, (2) the indigent's ability to investigate the crucial facts, (3) whether conflicting evidence implicating the need for cross-examination will be the major proof presented to the fact finder, (4) the indigent's ability to present the case or obtain private counsel, (5) the complexity of the legal issues, (6) the availability of counsel, (7) and special reasons why appointment of counsel would be likely to lead to a more just determination.
In Cooper, the court said that only if, after close scrutiny of the merits of the claim, the court finds it to be of substance should the other criteria be considered. 877 F.2d at 172, quoting Hodge v. Police Officers, 802 F.2d 58 (2d Cir. 1986).
The court has reviewed plaintiff's claims and has determined that they are likely to be of substance. Because plaintiff has a severe mental disability, the court finds it appropriate to appoint counsel underCooper's second, fourth and seventh factors.
The Pro Se office of this Court is directed to appoint counsel for the plaintiff. The government has submitted a motion for judgment on the pleadings in this case. That motion is held in abeyance pending appointment of counsel for the plaintiff.
So ordered.