Jr. v. Lopez
- Laura Swain
- 7:25-cv-03955
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Timmy L. Perkins Jr. v. Lopez, et al., Judge Roman denied Perkins’s request for pro bono counsel without prejudice.
Timmy L. Perkins Jr., whose request for court-facilitated appointment of volunteer counsel was denied without prejudice; the order did not decide the merits of his underlying claims.
What happened
In Timmy L. Perkins Jr. v. Lopez, et al., Timmy L. Perkins Jr. asked the court to appoint a volunteer lawyer to represent him in this civil case. The request was made in a motion received on May 6, 2025.
The court explained that it may ask a lawyer on its volunteer panel to represent an eligible person, but it cannot require a lawyer to take a civil case. Before appointing counsel, the court considers whether the claims appear likely to have merit and whether factors such as the case’s complexity or need for investigation make a lawyer necessary. The court found that Perkins had not shown he had tried unsuccessfully to find a lawyer on his own, and it could not conclude at this early stage that his claims were likely to succeed.
Judge Nelson S. Roman denied the motion without prejudice, meaning Perkins may renew the request later in the case. The clerk was directed to close the motion and send Perkins a copy of the order.
The detailed version
- Jr. v. Lopez · No. 7:25-cv-03955
- Laura Swain
- Oct. 9, 2025
Background
Timmy L. Perkins Jr. moved for appointment of pro bono counsel, meaning a volunteer attorney, in this civil action. The motion was received on May 6, 2025, and was docketed at ECF No. 4.
Legal standard
The court explained that, unlike in criminal cases, it generally cannot require an attorney to represent a person in a civil case. Under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1), however, the court may exercise discretion to have its Pro Se Office seek a volunteer attorney through the court’s pro bono panel.
The court applied the standards established by the Second Circuit. It first considers whether the litigant’s position appears likely to have substance. If that threshold is met, the court considers additional factors, including whether the person tried to obtain representation independently, whether the person can handle the case without assistance, the amount of factual investigation required, the complexity of the legal issues, and whether expert questioning of witnesses may be needed.
Analysis
The court found that Perkins’s motion did not establish that he had tried unsuccessfully to obtain counsel independently. The court also stated that, at this early stage, it could not conclude that his claims were likely to have merit. It noted that this assessment could change as the case progresses.
Disposition
Judge Nelson S. Roman denied Perkins’s motion for appointment of pro bono counsel without prejudice to renewal at a later stage. The clerk was directed to terminate the motion at ECF No. 4 and serve Perkins with a copy of the order at the address listed in the court’s records, while showing proof of service.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.