Jaber v. Hanley
- Edgardo Ramos
- 1:24-cv-00998
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Jaber v. Hanley, Judge Ramos denied Jaber’s request for appointed pro bono counsel, allowing possible renewal later.
Faouzi Jaber’s request for appointed pro bono counsel was denied; the order did not decide the underlying claims against Christina Hanley.
What happened
Faouzi Jaber, representing himself, sued Christina Hanley over the alleged government seizure of his personal property. He asked the court to have a volunteer lawyer represent him.
The court explained that it may ask a lawyer to represent someone who cannot afford counsel, but it cannot force a lawyer to take a civil case. The court first considers whether the claims appear likely to have merit, along with other factors.
Judge Edgardo Ramos said he could not conclude at this stage that Jaber’s claims were likely to have merit. He denied Jaber’s request for pro bono counsel without prejudice to possible renewal later and directed the Clerk to terminate the motion.
The detailed version
- Jaber v. Hanley · No. 1:24-cv-00998
- Edgardo Ramos
- June 26, 2024
Background
Faouzi Jaber, proceeding without a lawyer, brought claims arising from the alleged seizure of his personal property by the government. On June 11, 2024, he applied for appointment of pro bono counsel, meaning a lawyer who would represent him without charging him a fee. The application was docketed as Doc. 13.
Legal standard
The court explained that a federal statute allows a court to request that an attorney represent a person who cannot afford counsel. The statute does not allow courts to require attorneys to represent people who are handling civil cases without lawyers. Instead, the court may ask its Pro Se Office to circulate a request to attorneys on the court’s Pro Bono Panel.
In deciding whether to make that request, the court considers factors including the apparent merits of the case and the person’s ability to gather facts and present the case without assistance. The first question is whether the person’s position appears likely to have substance. If that threshold is met, the court considers additional factors, including the person’s ability to handle the case without a lawyer.
Ruling
The court stated that, at this stage, it could not conclude that Jaber’s claims were likely to have merit, while noting that this could change as the case progressed. Judge Edgardo Ramos therefore denied Jaber’s application for appointment of pro bono counsel without prejudice to possible renewal at a later stage. The Clerk of Court was directed to terminate the motion. The order did not resolve the underlying claims concerning the alleged seizure of Jaber’s property.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.