Bergrin v. United States of America
- Vernon Broderick
- 1:19-cv-09681
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Bergrin v. United States, Judge Broderick denied appointment of counsel without prejudice because the record did not yet show a potentially meritorious claim.
Ronald Bergrin’s request for appointed counsel was denied without prejudice; the order also governs how his future case-related correspondence must be filed.
What happened
In Bergrin v. United States, Ronald Bergrin, who was representing himself, asked the court to appoint a lawyer. The opinion does not describe the underlying claims.
The court said it needed a more developed record to decide whether Bergrin’s claims had enough potential merit to justify appointing volunteer counsel. It also noted that correspondence sent to the judge’s chambers email had not been filed and did not appear to make a specific request.
Judge Vernon S. Broderick denied the application for appointment of counsel without prejudice, allowing Bergrin to renew it later if he could show a potentially meritorious claim. The court also directed that case-related correspondence be filed on the docket unless there was a legal basis to request sealing.
The detailed version
- Bergrin v. United States of America · No. 1:19-cv-09681
- Vernon Broderick
- Feb. 5, 2020
Background
Ronald Bergrin, appearing without a lawyer, applied for appointment of counsel on January 28, 2020. The opinion does not identify the underlying claims or provide additional facts about the dispute.
The court also received correspondence from Bergrin dated February 4, 2020, sent to the judge’s chambers email. The correspondence had not been filed on the docket and did not appear to make a specific request.
Legal standard and analysis
The court explained that appointment of counsel requires consideration of the apparent strength of the plaintiff’s case, the plaintiff’s ability to pay for private counsel, efforts to find a lawyer, the availability of counsel, and the plaintiff’s ability to gather facts and address the issues without assistance. As a threshold matter, the plaintiff must show that the claim has substance or a likelihood of success.
The court stated that a more fully developed record was needed before it could determine whether Bergrin’s chances of success justified appointing counsel. It also emphasized that volunteer attorney time is limited and that counsel should not be appointed indiscriminately.
Disposition
The court denied Bergrin’s application for appointment of counsel without prejudice to renewal when the existence of a potentially meritorious claim could be demonstrated. The court further ordered that case-related correspondence addressed to the judge be filed on the docket unless there was a legal basis to seek an order allowing the correspondence to be filed under seal. The Clerk’s Office was directed to mail a copy of the order to Bergrin.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.