Fabricio v. Lee
- Philip Halpern
- 7:16-cv-08731
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Frederick Fabricio v. Sgt. Miller, Judge Briccetti denied more discovery and required a pro bono-counsel request by January 3, 2020.
Frederick Fabricio, whose requests for additional discovery were denied and whose discovery was closed; the defendants and their counsel, who were directed to arrange his telephone participation at the next conference.
What happened
In Frederick Fabricio v. Sgt. Miller and the other listed defendants, the court held a conference attended by defense counsel in person and Fabricio by telephone. Fabricio was representing himself and had been allowed to proceed without paying court fees.
The court denied Fabricio’s requests for additional discovery and closed discovery. It also ordered him to file, by January 3, 2020, a request for the court to seek a volunteer lawyer for him. The court scheduled another conference for January 30, 2020, and ordered defense counsel to arrange Fabricio’s telephone participation.
Judge Vincent L. Briccetti signed the order on December 20, 2019. He also certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied fee-free status for purposes of an appeal.
The detailed version
- Fabricio v. Lee · No. 7:16-cv-08731
- Philip Halpern
- Dec. 20, 2019
Background
The order followed an on-the-record conference. Defense counsel attended in person, while Frederick Fabricio attended by telephone. The order states that Fabricio was proceeding without a lawyer and without paying court fees.
Rulings
The court denied Fabricio’s requests for additional discovery and ordered that discovery was closed. The order does not state the reasons given at the conference for denying the requests.
The court also directed Fabricio to file a request by January 3, 2020, asking the court to seek volunteer counsel on his behalf. It scheduled the next conference for January 30, 2020, at 9:30 a.m., and directed defense counsel to make the arrangements necessary for Fabricio to appear by telephone.
Appeal-related certification
The court certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that an appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith. It therefore denied Fabricio permission to proceed without paying fees for purposes of an appeal. The order cited a Supreme Court decision discussing good faith in appeals involving nonfrivolous issues.
Effect of the order
This was a case-management and discovery order. It did not decide the underlying claims against the defendants.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.