Thani A.T. Al Thani v. Hanke
- John Cronan
- 1:20-cv-04765
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
In Al Thani v. Hanke, Judge Cronan requested volunteer lawyers for defendants Hanke and Sims, while leaving existing deadlines unchanged.
Defendants Alan J. Hanke and Sherry Sims, who may receive volunteer legal representation but are not guaranteed to obtain it.
What happened
In Thani A.T. Al Thani v. Hanke, defendants Alan J. Hanke and Sherry Sims told the court they could not afford lawyers. The court considered them financially unable to hire counsel and found that their defenses appeared likely to have substance.
The court said the case involved disputed credibility issues and overlapping, complex legal questions that could make it difficult for Hanke and Sims to present their defenses. It therefore directed the Clerk of Court to try to find volunteer lawyers for them.
Judge Cronan emphasized that the court could only request, not appoint, volunteer counsel; there was no guarantee that a lawyer would accept the case, and the litigation would continue at its normal pace. Existing deadlines were unchanged.
The detailed version
- Thani A.T. Al Thani v. Hanke · No. 1:20-cv-04765
- John Cronan
- July 8, 2025
Background
The order concerns defendants Alan J. Hanke and Sherry Sims. The court stated that both had represented that they could not employ counsel and therefore qualified as financially unable to afford a lawyer. The order's caption also lists Martin John Stevens v. Alan J. Hanke et al., No. 20 Civ. 8181 (JPC).
Legal standard
Under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1), a court may request a volunteer lawyer to represent a person who cannot afford counsel. In a civil case, the court cannot require a lawyer to take the case or appoint counsel in the same manner as in a criminal case. The court must consider whether the person's position appears likely to have substance and then evaluate factors such as the person's ability to investigate facts and present the case, the need to question witnesses, the complexity of the legal issues, and any special reason that counsel would help produce a fair result.
Court's analysis
The court found that Hanke's and Sims's defenses appeared likely to have substance, relying on reasons discussed in the court's earlier summary-judgment opinion. It said the claims could depend on credibility disputes involving the testimony of the plaintiffs and defendants. It also found that the claims presented overlapping and complex legal issues that could hinder Hanke's and Sims's ability to present their case. The court said these factors strongly supported requesting volunteer representation.
Order and practical effect
The court requested that the Clerk of Court attempt to locate pro bono counsel for Hanke and Sims. It warned that volunteer lawyers might not be available for a lengthy period, that no lawyer was guaranteed to accept the case, and that Hanke and Sims should be prepared to proceed without lawyers. If a volunteer offers to represent either defendant, that defendant may decide whether to retain the lawyer. The court did not change any previously set deadlines. Counsel for Al Thani was ordered to mail the order to Hanke and email it to Sims, then file proof of service by July 11, 2025.
Disposition
The court requested pro bono counsel; it did not appoint counsel or alter the existing deadlines.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.