From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

O'Kane v. N.Y. State Dep't of Corr. Serv.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
Sep 1, 2020
20-CV-2148 (LLS) (S.D.N.Y. Sep. 1, 2020)

Opinion

20-CV-2148 (LLS)

09-01-2020

DAVID O'KANE, Plaintiff, v. NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONAL SERVICE; THE LEGAL AID SOCIETY; RICHARD DeSLOM; JANE DOE, Parole Officer, Defendants.


ORDER :

Plaintiff, proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, brings this action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. By order dated July 10, 2020, the Court directed Plaintiff to amend his complaint to cure its deficiencies. (ECF No. 7.) On September 1, 2020, Plaintiff submitted an application to request pro bono counsel. (ECF No. 9.)

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).

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 grants Plaintiff an extension of time to comply with the July 10, 2020 order to amend.

Plaintiff may wish to consider contacting the New York Legal Assistance Group's (NYLAG) Legal 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. They may be able to help Plaintiff amend his pleading. A copy of the flyer with details of the clinic is attached to this order. The clinic is currently only available by telephone.

CONCLUSION

The Court denies Plaintiff's motion for pro bono counsel without prejudice, and the Clerk of Court is directed to terminate it (ECF 9.)

Plaintiff is directed to file an amended complaint that complies with the July 10, 2020 order. Plaintiff must submit the amended complaint to this Court's Pro Se Intake Unit within sixty days of the date of this order, caption the document as an "Amended Complaint," and label the document with docket number 20-CV-2148 (LLS). No summons will issue at this time. If Plaintiff fails to comply within the time allowed, and he cannot show good cause to excuse such failure, the complaint will be dismissed.

Plaintiff has consented to electronic service of court documents. SO ORDERED. Dated: September 1, 2020

New York, New York

/s/_________

Louis L. Stanton

U.S.D.J. NYLAG
NEW YORK LEGAL ASSISTANCE GROUP Since 1990, NYLAG has provided free civil legal services to New Yorkers who cannot afford private attorneys.

Free Legal Assistance for Self-Represented

Civil Litigants in Federal District Court

in Manhattan and White Plains

The NYLAG Legal Clinic for Pro Se Litigants in the Southern District of New York is a free legal clinic staffed by attorneys and paralegals to assist those who are representing themselves or planning to represent themselves in civil lawsuits in the Southern District of New York. The clinic, which is not part of or run by the court, assists litigants with federal civil cases including cases involving civil rights, employment discrimination, labor law, social security benefits, foreclosure and tax. The clinic cannot assist individuals while they are incarcerated, but can provide assistance to litigants once they are released from custody. To make an appointment for a consultation, call (212) 659-6190 or come by either clinic during office hours. Please note that a government-issued photo ID is required to enter either building.

The clinic offers in-person appointments only. The clinic does not offer assistance over the phone or by email.

Thurgood Marshall

United States Courthouse

Room LL22

40 Centre Street

New York, NY 10007

(212) 659 6190

Open weekdays

10 a.m. - 4 p.m.

Closed on federal and court holidays

The Hon. Charles L. Brieant Jr.

Federal Building and Courthouse

300 Quarropas St

White Plains, NY 10601

(212) 659 6190

Open Wednesday

12 p.m. - 4 p.m.

Closed on federal and court holidays

Disclaimer: The information contained herein is for informational purposes only and is not legal advice or a substitute for legal counsel, nor does it constitute advertising or a solicitation.


Summaries of

O'Kane v. N.Y. State Dep't of Corr. Serv.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
Sep 1, 2020
20-CV-2148 (LLS) (S.D.N.Y. Sep. 1, 2020)
Case details for

O'Kane v. N.Y. State Dep't of Corr. Serv.

Case Details

Full title:DAVID O'KANE, Plaintiff, v. NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONAL…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

Date published: Sep 1, 2020

Citations

20-CV-2148 (LLS) (S.D.N.Y. Sep. 1, 2020)