Szlosek v. NYS Office of the Attorney General
- Edgardo Ramos
- 1:24-cv-00897
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Szlosek v. NYS Office of the Attorney General, Judge Ramos denied without prejudice Szlosek’s request for pro bono counsel because merit was not yet shown.
Donna E. Szlosek’s request for volunteer counsel was denied without prejudice; her underlying discrimination and retaliation claims were not decided in this order.
What happened
Donna E. Szlosek, representing herself, sued her former employer, the New York State Office of the Attorney General, alleging age- and disability-based discrimination and retaliation. She asked the court to have a volunteer attorney represent her.
The court explained that it may ask an attorney to represent someone who cannot afford counsel, but it cannot require an attorney to take a civil case. The court must first consider whether the claims appear likely to have merit and then consider factors such as the person’s ability to present the case without assistance.
Judge Edgardo Ramos denied Szlosek’s request for pro bono counsel without prejudice to possible renewal later in the case. The court said it could not yet conclude that her claims were likely to have merit, while noting that this could change as the case progressed.
The detailed version
- Szlosek v. NYS Office of the Attorney General · No. 1:24-cv-00897
- Edgardo Ramos
- June 26, 2024
Background
Donna E. Szlosek, proceeding without a lawyer, brought this action against her former employer, the New York State Office of the Attorney General. She alleges that the defendant discriminated and retaliated against her because of her age and disability. On June 17, 2024, she filed an application asking the court to have a pro bono attorney appointed to represent her. The application was docketed as Document 17.
Legal standard
The court discussed 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1), which permits a court to request an attorney to represent a person who cannot afford counsel. The court explained that this statute does not allow it to require an attorney to represent a self-represented person in a civil case. Instead, the court may ask its Pro Se Office to circulate the matter to attorneys on the court’s Pro Bono Panel.
In deciding whether to request counsel, the court considers the apparent strength of the claims and the person’s ability to gather facts and present the case without a lawyer. The first question is whether the claims appear likely to have merit. If that threshold is met, the court considers additional factors, including the person’s ability to handle the case without assistance.
Ruling
The court stated that, at this stage, it could not conclude that Szlosek’s claims were likely to have merit. It noted that this assessment could change as the litigation progressed. The court therefore denied without prejudice Szlosek’s application for appointment of pro bono counsel, leaving open the possibility of renewing the request later. The Clerk of Court was directed to terminate Document 17.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.