Wilson v. Quiros et al
| Bryant Wilson |
| Angel Quiros, Robledo and John Doe |
| 3:2022cv01619 |
| December 19, 2022 |
| US District Court for the District of Connecticut |
| Thomas O Farrish |
| Sarala V Nagala |
| Prisoner: Civil Rights |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on May 10, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 10
ORDER denying #9 Motion to Appoint Counsel. Because civil litigants do not have a constitutional right to the appointment of counsel, a court's decision to appoint pro bono counsel is discretionary. Leftridge v. Connecticut State Trooper Officer No. 1283, 640 F.3d 62, 68-69 (2d Cir. 2011) ("A party has no constitutionally guaranteed right to the assistance of counsel in a civil case." (citation omitted)); Hodge v. Police Officers, 802 F.2d 58, 60 (2d Cir. 1986) ("Broad discretion lies with the district judge in deciding whether to appoint counsel[.]" (citation omitted)); 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1915(e)(1) (permitting district court to appoint pro bono counsel for indigent litigant). The Second Circuit has cautioned the district courts against the "routine appointment of counsel." Cooper v. A. Sargenti Co., 877 F.2d 170, 173-74 (2d Cir. 1989). Before an appointment of pro bono counsel for an indigent litigant is considered, the indigent person must demonstrate that he tried, but was unable, to secure counsel. Hodge, 802 F.2d at 61. In addition, the district court must "determine whether the indigent's position seems likely to be of substance." Id. at 61; see also Cooper, 877 F.2d at 171. If the claims are sufficiently meritorious, the court should then consider other factors bearing on the need for appointment of counsel, including the movant's ability to investigate the factual issues of the case, whether conflicting evidence implicating the need for cross-examination will be the major proof presented, the movant's apparent ability to present the case, and the complexity of the legal issues involved. See Hodge, 802 F.2d at 61-62. The Court is mindful of the difficulties faced by parties when litigating an action without an attorney, particularly when that party is incarcerated. However, the Court can only impose upon private attorneys to give their time and efforts without compensation in cases where the plaintiff has demonstrated that the claims have sufficient merit. This case is still in its very early stages and, at this time, the Court cannot conclude that Plaintiff has satisfied that threshold requirement in this case. Because Plaintiff has not demonstrated that his claims are sufficiently likely to succeed on the merits, his motion for appointment of counsel is DENIED without prejudice. Plaintiff may file a new motion at a later stage of the litigation, after he has shown that his claims have sufficient merit. Signed by Judge Sarala V. Nagala on 1/4/23. (Marks, Joshua)
|
| Filing 9 MOTION For Appointment Of Counsel, by Bryant Wilson. (Mendez, D) |
|
Filing 8
ORDER granting #2 Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis.If you change your address at any time during the litigation of this case, Local Rule 83.1(c)2 provides that you notify the court. Signed by Judge Thomas O. Farrish on 12/21/2022. (Corriette, M.)
|
|
Filing 7
ELECTRONIC FILING ORDER FOR COUNSEL - PLEASE ENSURE COMPLIANCE WITH COURTESY COPY REQUIREMENTS IN THIS ORDER. Signed by Judge Sarala V. Nagala on 12/19/2022. (Mendez, D)
|
|
Filing 6
Prisoner E-Filing Standing Order. Signed by Judge Janet C. Hall on 12/19/2022. (Mendez, D)
|
|
Filing 5
STANDING PROTECTIVE ORDER. Signed by Judge Sarala V. Nagala on 12/19/2022. (Mendez, D)
|
| Filing 4 Notice: Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 7.1 and Local Rule 7.1, any nongovernmental corporate party must electronically file a disclosure statement that identifies any parent corporation and any publicly held corporation owning 10% or more of its stock or states that there is no such corporation. Such disclosure statement must be filed with a party's first appearance, pleading, petition, motion, response, or other request addressed to the Court and must be supplemented if any required information changes during the case. Signed by Clerk on 12/19/2022.(Chartier, AnnMarie) |
| Filing 3 Prisoner Trust Fund Account Statement by Bryant Wilson. (Chartier, AnnMarie) |
| Filing 2 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis by Bryant Wilson. (Chartier, AnnMarie) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against John Doe, Angel Quiros, Robledo, filed by Bryant Wilson. (Attachments: #1 Attachment, #2 Envelope)(Chartier, AnnMarie) |
| Judge Sarala V. Nagala and Judge Thomas O. Farrish added. (Oliver, T.) |
Access additional case information on PACER
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the Connecticut District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
