Lurch v. The City of New York
- Valerie Caproni
- 1:19-cv-11254
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Lurch v. The City of New York, Judge Wang denied Lurch’s request for appointed counsel because his claims lacked demonstrated substance or likely success.
Robert Derek Lurch, Jr.’s request for appointed counsel was denied. The order also directed the Clerk of Court to close the docket entry for that request and mail him a copy of the order.
What happened
Robert Derek Lurch, Jr., who was representing himself, asked the court to appoint a lawyer in his case against The City of New York and other defendants.
The court considered whether his claims had substance or a reasonable likelihood of success, along with other factors relevant to appointing counsel. It concluded that he did not meet the required initial showing.
Magistrate Judge Ona T. Wang denied Lurch’s request for appointed counsel. The order noted that the complaint had already been dismissed and that Lurch had been ordered to explain why the case should not be dismissed with prejudice for failing to prosecute.
The detailed version
- Lurch v. The City of New York · No. 1:19-cv-11254
- Valerie Caproni
- May 13, 2021
Background
Robert Derek Lurch, Jr. filed an application seeking appointment of counsel. The opinion describes him as representing himself. The request was filed on November 10, 2020.
The court noted that the District Court had dismissed the complaint in a March 29, 2021 memorandum opinion and order. It also noted that, on May 11, 2021, the court had issued an order requiring Lurch to explain why the case should not be dismissed with prejudice for failure to prosecute under Rule 41(b).
Legal standard
Before appointing counsel for a person who cannot obtain a lawyer, the court considers the apparent strength of the claims, the person’s ability to pay for a private lawyer, efforts to find a lawyer, whether a lawyer is available, and whether the person can gather facts and address the legal issues without assistance. The person must first show that the claims have substance or a likelihood of success.
Ruling
Magistrate Judge Ona T. Wang denied Lurch’s request for appointed counsel. The court concluded that, in light of the earlier dismissal of the complaint and the order concerning possible dismissal for failure to prosecute, Lurch had not met the required initial showing that his claims had substance or a likelihood of success.
The order also directed the Clerk of Court to close the docket entry for the counsel request and mail a copy of the order to Lurch.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.