Askew v. Lindsey
- Paul Davison
- 7:15-cv-07496
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Askew v. Lindsey, Magistrate Judge Davison granted Askew’s request for volunteer counsel and directed the Clerk to seek an attorney for trial.
Askew, who was representing himself, may receive representation from a volunteer attorney at trial if one accepts the case. Volunteer attorneys may seek reimbursement for certain eligible out-of-pocket expenses.
What happened
In Askew v. Lindsey, Askew was representing himself and had previously asked the court to appoint free volunteer counsel. Judge Davison considered the upcoming jury trial a changed circumstance.
The court found that a lawyer familiar with legal rules would likely help produce a fairer decision. It directed the Clerk of Court to try to find a volunteer attorney to represent Askew at trial.
Magistrate Judge Paul E. Davison granted the request for volunteer counsel on December 5, 2019. The court warned that no attorney was guaranteed to accept the case and that Askew should remain prepared to proceed without a lawyer.
The detailed version
- Askew v. Lindsey · No. 7:15-cv-07496
- Paul Davison
- Dec. 5, 2019
Background Askew had been proceeding without a lawyer. On January 5, 2016, Askew moved for appointment of free volunteer counsel. Judge Kenneth M. Karas denied that request without prejudice, meaning it could be renewed, and stated that Askew could renew it if circumstances materially changed. The parties later consented to Magistrate Judge Paul E. Davison’s jurisdiction for all purposes.
Reasoning The case was scheduled for a jury trial on April 20, 2020. The court determined that the prospect of a jury trial was a changed circumstance. It also found that participation by a lawyer familiar with the law and court rules would likely lead to a fairer determination of the case.
Ruling The court granted the request for pro bono counsel and directed the Clerk of Court to try to locate a volunteer attorney to represent Askew at the upcoming trial. The court explained that no funds were available to hire lawyers in civil cases and that it relied on volunteers. It warned that no volunteer attorney was guaranteed to accept the case, so Askew should remain prepared to proceed to trial without a lawyer. The court also noted that volunteer counsel could seek reimbursement for certain out-of-pocket expenses under the court’s standing order.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.