Cruz v. I.C.M. Manhattan, NY
- Valerie Caproni
- 1:20-cv-04392
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Cruz v. I.C.M., Judge Moses denied Abraham Cruz’s requests for volunteer counsel without prejudice because the record did not show a sufficient chance of success.
Abraham Cruz, whose requests for court-requested volunteer counsel were denied without prejudice.
What happened
In Cruz v. I.C.M. Manhattan, NY, Abraham Cruz asked the court to request volunteer lawyers to represent him in his civil case. These were his third and fourth requests for counsel.
The court considered whether Cruz’s claims appeared strong enough, whether he could afford a private lawyer, whether he had tried to find one, whether a volunteer lawyer was available, and whether he could handle the case himself. The record did not contain new information that changed the court’s earlier assessment.
Judge Moses denied both requests without prejudice, meaning Cruz may renew them if circumstances change. The court also directed the clerk to close the two motions and mail Cruz a copy of the order.
The detailed version
- Cruz v. I.C.M. Manhattan, NY · No. 1:20-cv-04392
- Valerie Caproni
- Oct. 21, 2020
Background
Abraham Cruz filed two letter-motions asking the court to request volunteer counsel to represent him. The court treated these as his third and fourth applications for pro bono counsel. The court had previously denied two similar applications because it was too early to assess the merits of the case.
The court explained that a request for counsel in a civil case depends on several factors, including the apparent strength of the claims, the plaintiff’s ability to pay for a private lawyer, efforts to obtain a lawyer, the availability of volunteer counsel, and the plaintiff’s ability to gather facts and address the issues without a lawyer. As a threshold matter, the plaintiff must show that the claims have substance or a likelihood of success.
The court also explained that under the statute governing people who cannot afford filing fees, a court cannot force a lawyer to take a civil case. It may only ask a lawyer to volunteer. The court noted that volunteer attorney time is limited and should not be assigned indiscriminately.
Related Case Developments
The court stated that it had recently dismissed, without prejudice, Cruz’s claims challenging his conviction and sentencing in federal and state courts in Pennsylvania because the court lacked jurisdiction over those claims. For the remaining claims, the court had directed Cruz to file a second amended complaint after receiving enough information to identify the intended defendants.
Ruling
Judge Barbara Moses held that the record did not show a sufficient likelihood of success on the merits to support a request for volunteer counsel. The court therefore denied Cruz’s two applications, without prejudice to renewal if he could demonstrate a change in the relevant circumstances. The clerk was directed to close the motions at docket entries 16 and 18 and mail Cruz a copy of the order.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.