From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Salim v. Cnty. of Erie

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
Aug 31, 2017
15-CV-418A(Sr) (W.D.N.Y. Aug. 31, 2017)

Opinion

15-CV-418A(Sr)

08-31-2017

RAFIQ J. SALIM, Plaintiff, v. COUNTY OF ERIE, et al., Defendants.


DECISION AND ORDER

This case was referred to the undersigned by the Hon. Richard J. Arcara, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), for all pretrial matters and to hear and report upon dispositive motions. Dkt. #3.

In response to defendants' motions to dismiss, plaintiff requests appointment of legal counsel to properly litigate matters before this Court. Dkt. #20. Plaintiff argues that his failure to effect proper service upon defendants demonstrates his inability to proceed without such assistance. Dkt. #20.

There is no constitutional right to appointed counsel in civil cases. Under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e), the Court may appoint counsel to assist indigent litigants. See, e.g., Sears, Roebuck & Co. v. Charles W. Sears Real Estate, Inc., 865 F.2d 22, 23 (2d Cir. 1988). Assignment of counsel is clearly within the judge's discretion. In re Martin-Trigona, 737 F.2d 1254, 1260 (2d Cir. 1984). The factors to be considered in deciding whether or not to assign counsel include the following:

1. Whether the indigent's claims seem likely to be of substance;

2. Whether the indigent is able to investigate the crucial facts concerning his claim;

3. Whether conflicting evidence implicating the need for cross-examination will be the major proof presented to the fact finder;

4. Whether the legal issues involved are complex; and

5. Whether there are any special reasons why appointment of counsel would be more likely to lead to a just determination.
Hendricks v. Coughlin, 114 F.3d 390, 392 (2d Cir. 1997); see also Hodge v. Police Officers, 802 F.2d 58, 61-62 (2d Cir. 1986).

The Court must consider the issue of appointment carefully, of course, because "volunteer lawyer time is a precious commodity." Cooper v. A. Sargenti Co. Inc., 877 F.2d 170, 172 (2d Cir. 1989). Therefore, the Court must not allocate pro bono resources "arbitrarily, or on the basis of the aggressiveness and tenacity of the claimant," but should instead distribute this resource "with reference to public benefit." Id. Moreover, the Court must consider the "likelihood of merit" of the underlying dispute. Hendricks, 114 F.3d at 392; Cooper, 877 F.2d at 174. "[E]ven though a claim may not be characterized as frivolous, counsel should not be appointed in a case where the merits of the . . . claim are thin and his chances of prevailing are therefore poor." Carmona v. United States Bureau of Prisons, 243 F.3d 629, 632 (2d Cir. 2001) (denying counsel on appeal where petitioner's appeal was not frivolous but nevertheless appeared to have little merit).

This case is in its initial stages, making it difficult to assess the merits of plaintiff's claim. However, there is no indication that plaintiff is incapable of presenting his arguments to the Court. Plaintiff's complaint and response to defendants' motions clearly state his position. While plaintiff has not yet effected proper service of his complaint, that is not a basis for appointing pro bono counsel. As a result, plaintiff has not established that the appointment of counsel is warranted at this time under the factors set forth above. It is the plaintiff's responsibility to retain an attorney or press forward with this lawsuit pro se. 28 U.S.C. § 1654. Plaintiff's request for appointment of counsel (Dkt. #20), is denied without prejudice.

SO ORDERED. DATED: Buffalo, New York

August 31, 2017

s/ H . Kenneth Schroeder , Jr.

H. KENNETH SCHROEDER, JR.

United States Magistrate Judge


Summaries of

Salim v. Cnty. of Erie

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
Aug 31, 2017
15-CV-418A(Sr) (W.D.N.Y. Aug. 31, 2017)
Case details for

Salim v. Cnty. of Erie

Case Details

Full title:RAFIQ J. SALIM, Plaintiff, v. COUNTY OF ERIE, et al., Defendants.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

Date published: Aug 31, 2017

Citations

15-CV-418A(Sr) (W.D.N.Y. Aug. 31, 2017)

Citing Cases

Murphy v. City of Elmira

is three years. Salim v. Cnty. of Erie, 15-CV-418A(Sr), 2017 WL 3837228, at *5 (W.D.N.Y. Aug. 31, …