From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Figueroa v. Ercole

United States District Court, S.D. New York
Jul 6, 2010
10 Civ. 3262 (S.D.N.Y. Jul. 6, 2010)

Opinion

10 Civ. 3262.

July 6, 2010


ORDER


Pro se plaintiff Frank Figueroa ("Figueroa") has applied for the Court to request counsel to represent him in this matter. The threshold consideration in ruling on such an application is the showing of some merit. See Cooper v. A. Sargenti Co., 877 F.2d 170, 172-74 (2d Cir. 1989). Figueroa has not yet met this standard at this stage in the proceeding. If upon the development of a fuller evidentiary record, he can make such a showing at a later point in the litigation, he may reapply for appointment of counsel at that time. Accordingly, it is hereby

ORDERED that the motion of plaintiff Frank Figueroa for appointment of counsel is denied without prejudice.

SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Figueroa v. Ercole

United States District Court, S.D. New York
Jul 6, 2010
10 Civ. 3262 (S.D.N.Y. Jul. 6, 2010)
Case details for

Figueroa v. Ercole

Case Details

Full title:FRANK FIGUEROA, Plaintiff, v. ROBERT ERCOLE, Defendant

Court:United States District Court, S.D. New York

Date published: Jul 6, 2010

Citations

10 Civ. 3262 (S.D.N.Y. Jul. 6, 2010)