Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Dec. 16, 2020

Lurch, Jr. v. The City of New York

Judge
Alison Nathan
Docket
1:19-cv-11253
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil ProcedureDiscoveryPro Se
In one sentence

In Lurch, Jr. v. City of New York, Judge Parker denied counsel without prejudice and extended discovery while scheduling a conference.

Who this affects

Robert Derek Lurch, Jr., who was proceeding without a lawyer, and the defendants involved in the discovery dispute.

What happened

In Lurch, Jr. v. City of New York, the court addressed Robert Derek Lurch, Jr.’s request for a free lawyer and several discovery issues. The order states that Lurch was representing himself.

The court said it was too early to evaluate the case’s strength, so it denied Lurch’s request for a lawyer without prejudice, allowing him to renew it later. The court also scheduled a conference about the defendants’ request to require Lurch to respond to discovery requests and extended the fact-discovery deadline by 90 days.

Magistrate Judge Katharine H. Parker issued the order on December 16, 2020. The court directed the Clerk to send a copy to Lurch.

The detailed version

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

Case
Lurch, Jr. v. The City of New York · No. 1:19-cv-11253
Judge
Alison Nathan
Date
Dec. 16, 2020

Background

The court evaluated the parties’ submissions about several issues in the case. The opinion identifies Robert Derek Lurch, Jr. as a pro se plaintiff, meaning he was litigating without a lawyer.

Request for Pro Bono Counsel

Lurch asked the court to appoint a lawyer to represent him without charge. The court explained that it considers the apparent merits of the case, the plaintiff’s efforts to find a lawyer, and the plaintiff’s ability to investigate and present the case without help. Because the proceedings were still at an early stage and the court could not yet assess the merits, it denied the motion for counsel, ECF No. 63, without prejudice to renewal at a later date.

Discovery

The court scheduled a discovery conference for February 25, 2021, at 2:00 p.m. The conference was to address the defendants’ letter motion seeking to compel Lurch to respond to discovery requests. The court also extended the fact-discovery deadline by 90 days. The order directed the parties to call the court’s conference line at the scheduled time.

Disposition

Magistrate Judge Katharine H. Parker denied the request for pro bono counsel without prejudice, scheduled the discovery conference, and extended the fact-discovery deadline by 90 days. The court also requested that the Clerk send a copy of the order to the pro se plaintiff. The order did not decide the merits of the underlying case.

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.