Tripathy v. McClowski
- Cathy Seibel
- 7:21-cv-06584
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 6
In Tripathy v. McClowski, Judge Seibel granted Tripathy’s counsel motion only to the extent the court would request a volunteer attorney.
Sanjay Tripathy, who must continue representing himself unless a volunteer attorney agrees to take the case; the defendants and the ongoing litigation may also be affected by any later volunteer appointment.
What happened
In Tripathy v. McClowski, Sanjay Tripathy, representing himself, asked the court to appoint a volunteer lawyer for his scheduled jury trial. He said his case involved religious-diet claims against about 15 defendants and that he could not afford private counsel.
Tripathy argued that the trial’s complexity, the defendants’ resources, and his lack of trial experience supported appointing counsel. He requested help with jury selection, questioning witnesses, presenting evidence, and making legal arguments.
Judge Cathy Seibel granted the motion only to the extent that the court would request counsel. She warned that the court has no funds to hire lawyers in civil cases, that finding a volunteer could take a long time, that no lawyer was guaranteed to accept the case, and that Tripathy must continue representing himself unless a volunteer agrees to take the case.
The detailed version
- Tripathy v. McClowski · No. 7:21-cv-06584
- Cathy Seibel
- Mar. 11, 2025
Background
Sanjay Tripathy, proceeding without a lawyer, asked the court to appoint volunteer counsel for a jury trial scheduled to begin on April 28, 2025. The motion states that the case concerns allegations that a state prisoner was denied a diet consistent with his Hindi religion and was exposed to nearby inmates consuming beef. The order identifies claims under the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act and the First Amendment’s protection for religious exercise, involving specified defendants.
Tripathy said that approximately 15 defendants were represented by the New York State Attorney General’s Office, that the case involved complex legal and factual issues, and that he had been unable to obtain private counsel because of financial hardship. He requested assistance with jury selection, questioning himself and other witnesses, and presenting legal arguments and objections.
Ruling
Judge Cathy Seibel granted the motion for appointment of counsel to the extent that the court would request counsel. The court explained that there are no funds to retain counsel in civil cases and that it relies on volunteer attorneys. It warned that a volunteer might not be found for a lengthy period, that no volunteer was guaranteed to accept the case, and that the litigation would continue while Tripathy represented himself. If an attorney volunteers, that attorney will contact Tripathy, and Tripathy may decide whether to retain that attorney.
Read the full 6-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.