Lebron v. Ramos

Background

Richard Lebron brought claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 concerning medical care while he was housed at the North Infirmary Command of Rikers Island. He alleges that officials, including Dr. Raul Ramos and Wolfe, were deliberately indifferent to serious medical needs related to his polycystic kidney disease, an injury during dialysis, and the denial of pain medication.

According to the complaint, Dr. Ramos denied Lebron access to pain medication, prevented examination by a renal specialist, and prevented transfer to Bellevue Hospital. Lebron alleges that his condition worsened, resulting in end-stage renal failure and the need for dialysis three times each week. He also alleges that Wolfe cut him while removing a dialysis bandage and that delays in obtaining emergency treatment led to substantial blood loss, seizures, and heart failure. Lebron further alleges that he became epileptic and might need seizure medication for the rest of his life.

Request for Volunteer Counsel

The court had already granted Lebron permission to proceed without paying filing fees, so it found that he qualified as indigent. Under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1), a court may request—but cannot require—an attorney to volunteer in a civil case. The court explained that volunteer counsel should be sought sparingly.

Applying the factors from Hodge v. Police Officers, the court found that Lebron’s claim was “likely to be of substance” and appeared to have some chance of success. The court also found that the relevant factors favored assistance because Lebron, as an inmate, would have limited ability to investigate facts; the case would likely involve cross-examination and depositions; and the medical issues could require expert and other evidence. Lebron had also stated that he had no legal education or experience to represent himself.

Ruling

The court directed the Clerk of Court to attempt to locate pro bono counsel—an attorney volunteering legal services—for the limited purpose of conducting discovery. Counsel may also participate in settlement discussions. The court said it would consider expanding counsel’s role later, but counsel would not be required to respond to a dispositive motion unless the scope of the representation was expanded. The representation would end after discovery upon filing a notice of completion.

The court warned that no public funds were available to retain civil-case counsel, that finding a volunteer could take a substantial amount of time, and that no attorney was guaranteed to accept the case. It certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to proceed without paying fees for an appeal. It also postponed the initial pretrial conference scheduled for November 25, 2019, to be rescheduled later. The order was therefore an ancillary order about limited legal representation and case management, not a decision on the merits of Lebron’s medical-care claims.