Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Oct. 6, 2020

Cox v. Morley

Judge
Nelson Roman
Docket
7:20-cv-07381
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil ProcedurePro Se
In one sentence

In Cox v. Morley, Judge Roman denied Cox’s request for free counsel without prejudice because the case was too early to assess its merits.

Who this affects

Sampson Cox’s request for appointed pro bono counsel and his ability to appeal this order without paying the filing fee.

What happened

In Cox v. Morley, Sampson Cox, who was incarcerated and representing himself, asked the court to appoint a free lawyer in his case against Chief Doctor John Morley and others.

Cox’s complaint alleged that he was being denied adequate medical treatment. He filed the complaint on September 9, 2020, and requested a lawyer on October 5, 2020.

Judge Nelson S. Roman denied the request without prejudice because the case was at too early a stage for the court to assess its merits. The court also denied permission to appeal without paying the filing fee.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Cox v. Morley · No. 7:20-cv-07381
Judge
Nelson Roman
Date
Oct. 6, 2020

Background

Sampson Cox, who was incarcerated at Great Meadow Correctional Facility, filed a complaint alleging that he was being denied adequate medical treatment. He was proceeding without a lawyer and without paying the usual filing fees. Cox then moved for the appointment of pro bono counsel, meaning a lawyer provided without charge.

Legal standard

The court considered the factors used for an indigent litigant’s request for appointed counsel: the apparent merits of the case, the plaintiff’s efforts to obtain a lawyer, and the plaintiff’s ability to investigate and present the case without assistance. The court stated that the merits of the case receive the most attention among these factors.

Ruling

The court denied Cox’s motion for pro bono counsel without prejudice because the proceedings were too early for the court to assess the merits of the action. “Without prejudice” means the request could be renewed later. The Clerk of Court was directed to terminate the motion and mail Cox a copy of the order.

The court also certified that an appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith and denied Cox permission to proceed without paying the filing fee for an appeal.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.