Montero v. New York City Housing Authority
- James Oetken
- 1:24-cv-09301
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Antony Montero v. New York City Housing Authority, Judge Swain denied Montero’s request for volunteer counsel without prejudice while statutory review continued.
Antony Montero, who is representing himself; the order addresses only his request for volunteer counsel and does not decide the claims against the defendants.
What happened
In Antony Montero v. New York City Housing Authority, Antony Montero, who is representing himself, asked the court to request a volunteer lawyer for him. The case was still undergoing the required review of his claims because he is proceeding under the statute for people who cannot pay court costs.
The court said it was too early to decide whether requesting volunteer counsel was appropriate. The court also explained that it could ask a lawyer to volunteer but could not appoint one under the statute.
Judge Laura Taylor Swain denied Montero’s application without prejudice, meaning he may file another request if the case proceeds after the statutory review. The clerk was directed to close the application, and the court denied fee-free status for any appeal from this order.
The detailed version
- Montero v. New York City Housing Authority · No. 1:24-cv-09301
- James Oetken
- Sept. 11, 2025
Background
Antony Montero filed an application asking the court to request a volunteer lawyer to represent him. The opinion states that Montero is representing himself and proceeding without paying court fees. His application was docketed as ECF 5.
The case was undergoing the review required by 28 U.S.C. § 1915. That review requires the court to determine, before summonses are issued, whether the action should be dismissed because it is frivolous or malicious, fails to state a claim, or seeks money from a defendant who is immune from that relief.
Legal standard
The court explained that, when deciding whether to request volunteer counsel for a person who cannot afford a lawyer, it considers the strength of the claims, the person’s efforts to find a lawyer, and the person’s ability to investigate and present the case without assistance. The merits of the claims receive the most attention. The court also stated that the statute allows the court to request that an attorney volunteer, but does not give the court authority to appoint counsel.
Ruling
Because the statutory review was still underway, the court held that it was too early to determine whether it should request volunteer counsel for Montero. The court denied Montero’s application without prejudice to his filing another application if the action proceeds after the statutory review. The court directed the Clerk of Court to terminate ECF 5.
The court also certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that an appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith and denied fee-free status for purposes of an appeal.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.