Dubose v. SUNY Maritime College Office of Financial Aid

Background

Malcolm Dubose made a renewed request for appointment of pro bono counsel, meaning a volunteer lawyer. He argued that counsel was needed because the defendants had a team of attorneys, his amended claims raised new questions of federal law, and evidence submitted in his opposition strengthened his case. The court had previously denied his initial request because it was too early to assess the merits of the case.

Court’s analysis

The court applied factors including the apparent merit of Dubose’s claims, his ability to pay for private counsel, his efforts to obtain a lawyer, the availability of counsel, and his ability to gather facts and address the issues without assistance.

The court found that Dubose had not shown that his claims had substance or were likely to succeed. It also found that the case was still at a stage where the merits could not be adequately assessed: the defendants had moved to dismiss the complaint, and briefing on that motion was not complete.

The court further found that Dubose had not shown sufficient efforts to obtain counsel or explained why his new claims were more burdensome to pursue than his original claims. The court noted that he had represented himself effectively, filed several motions, and opposed the defendants’ motion to dismiss.

Disposition

Judge Jennifer L. Rochon denied Dubose’s renewed request for pro bono counsel. The order did not decide the underlying claims or the pending motion to dismiss. The court reminded Dubose that he could contact the City Bar Justice Center’s Pro Se Law Clinic for assistance, but that filings still had to be made by him through the court’s Pro Se Intake Unit.