White-Grier v. The Department of Education of The City of New York

Justia Dockets & Filings Second Circuit New York Southern District White-Grier v. The Department of Education of The City of New York

White-Grier v. The Department of Education of The City of New York

Plaintiff:	Cheryl White-Grier
Defendant:	The Department of Education of The City of New York
Case Number:	1:2011cv08142
Filed:	November 10, 2011
Court:	US District Court for the Southern District of New York
Office:	Foley Square Office
County:	New York
Presiding Judge:	John G. Koeltl
Nature of Suit:	Employment
Cause of Action:	28 U.S.C. § 1441
Jury Demanded By:	None

Follow case documents by RSS

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed	Document Text
June 20, 2012	Filing 17 MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER: The Court has received the attached correspondence from the plaintiff, which it forwards to the parties. The plaintiff requests that the Court appoint pro bono counsel in her case. However, the Court cannot determine whe ther the necessary showing for appointment of counsel has been met. The Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit has articulated factors that should guide the Courts discretion to appoint counsel to represent an indigent civil litigant under 28 U.S.C. § 1915. For the Court to order the appointment of counsel, the petitioner must, as a threshold matter, demonstrate that her claim has substance or a likelihood of success on the merits. Only then can the Court consider the other factors appropr iate to determination of whether counsel should be appointed: "plaintiff's ability to obtain representation independently, and her ability to handle the case without assistance in the light of the required factual investigation, the complex ity of the legal issues, and the need for expertly conducted cross-examination to test veracity." The plaintiff has not yet made such a showing. The plaintiff's application for the Court to appoint counsel is therefore denied without prejud ice for failure to make the required showing at this time. The sixty-day stay imposed by the Court's Order of April 17, 2012 has now expired. The plaintiff informs the Court that she is now proceeding pro se. The plaintiff should advise the Pro Se Office of her address and a phone number at which she can be reached, so that papers can be served directly on her. (Signed by Judge John G. Koeltl on 6/19/2012) (jfe)

Date Filed

Document Text

June 20, 2012

Filing 17 MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER: The Court has received the attached correspondence from the plaintiff, which it forwards to the parties. The plaintiff requests that the Court appoint pro bono counsel in her case. However, the Court cannot determine whe ther the necessary showing for appointment of counsel has been met. The Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit has articulated factors that should guide the Courts discretion to appoint counsel to represent an indigent civil litigant under 28 U.S.C. § 1915. For the Court to order the appointment of counsel, the petitioner must, as a threshold matter, demonstrate that her claim has substance or a likelihood of success on the merits. Only then can the Court consider the other factors appropr iate to determination of whether counsel should be appointed: "plaintiff's ability to obtain representation independently, and her ability to handle the case without assistance in the light of the required factual investigation, the complex ity of the legal issues, and the need for expertly conducted cross-examination to test veracity." The plaintiff has not yet made such a showing. The plaintiff's application for the Court to appoint counsel is therefore denied without prejud ice for failure to make the required showing at this time. The sixty-day stay imposed by the Court's Order of April 17, 2012 has now expired. The plaintiff informs the Court that she is now proceeding pro se. The plaintiff should advise the Pro Se Office of her address and a phone number at which she can be reached, so that papers can be served directly on her. (Signed by Judge John G. Koeltl on 6/19/2012) (jfe)

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 New York Southern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: White-Grier v. The Department of Education of The City of New York
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Plaintiff: Cheryl White-Grier
Represented By:	Stewart Lee Karlin
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Finance	[ Google Finance \| Yahoo Finance \| Hoovers \| SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Justia Dockets \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Defendant: The Department of Education of The City of New York
Represented By:	Daniel Sergio Gomez-Sanchez
Represented By:	Stewart Lee Karlin
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Finance	[ Google Finance \| Yahoo Finance \| Hoovers \| SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Justia Dockets \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]

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.

Why Is My Information Online?