Ford v. The Board of Education of The City School District of the City of NY
- Colleen McMahon
- 1:19-cv-06327
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Ford v. Board of Education, Chief Judge McMahon denied Ford’s counsel request without prejudice because he had not filed an amended complaint.
Brian Ford, the self-represented plaintiff, may file another request for pro bono counsel after filing a compliant amended complaint; the order also denies him permission to appeal without paying filing fees.
What happened
In Ford v. The Board of Education of The City School District of the City of NY, Brian Ford was allowed to file an amended complaint within 60 days after an earlier court order, and later received a 60-day extension. He had not filed the amended complaint when he asked the court to request a free lawyer for him.
The court said it could not yet evaluate the strength of Ford’s case, which is the most important factor in deciding whether to appoint counsel. It therefore denied his application without prejudice, allowing him to file another application after submitting an amended complaint that follows the earlier order.
Chief Judge Colleen McMahon also denied Ford permission to appeal without paying filing fees, finding that an appeal would not be taken in good faith. The clerk was directed to mail Ford a copy of the order and record service on the docket.
The detailed version
- Ford v. The Board of Education of The City School District of the City of NY · No. 1:19-cv-06327
- Colleen McMahon
- Mar. 3, 2020
Background
Brian Ford, who was representing himself and had been allowed to proceed without paying filing fees, had been given permission to file an amended complaint within 60 days of a November 6, 2019 order. On January 8, 2020, the court granted him a further 60-day extension. Ford had not filed an amended complaint when he submitted an application asking the court to request a pro bono lawyer.
Reasoning
The court identified three factors relevant to a request for appointed counsel by a person who cannot afford a lawyer: the potential merits of the case, the person’s efforts to find a lawyer, and the person’s ability to investigate facts and present the case without help. The court stated that the merits receive the most attention. Because the case was still at an early stage, the court could not assess its merits.
Ruling
The court denied Ford’s application for the court to request pro bono counsel without prejudice to Ford filing another application after he files an amended complaint complying with the November 6, 2019 order. The court directed the clerk to mail Ford a copy of the order and note service on the docket. It also certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to appeal without paying filing fees.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.