Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Apr. 6, 2022

Mikell v. K&R Realty Inc.

Judge
Edgardo Ramos
Docket
1:21-cv-09084
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Pro SeCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Mikell v. K&R Realty, Judge Ramos denied Mikell’s request for free counsel without prejudice because the claims were not yet shown likely meritorious.

Who this affects

Kadeem Mikell’s request for court-requested volunteer counsel was denied without prejudice, so he could potentially renew it later in the case.

What happened

In Mikell v. K&R Realty Inc., Kadeem Mikell, who was representing himself, asked the court to request a volunteer lawyer to represent him.

The court explained that it could request, but could not require, an attorney to represent a person without a lawyer in a civil case. It first had to decide whether Mikell’s claims appeared likely to have merit.

Judge Edgardo Ramos denied Mikell’s request for free counsel without prejudice because the court could not yet conclude that his claims were likely to have merit. The order allowed Mikell to renew the request later as the case progressed.

The detailed version

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

Case
Mikell v. K&R Realty Inc. · No. 1:21-cv-09084
Judge
Edgardo Ramos
Date
Apr. 6, 2022

Background

Kadeem Mikell brought this action while representing himself. He later asked the court to request free legal representation from an attorney through the court’s volunteer-lawyer program.

Legal standard

The court explained that it cannot force an attorney to represent a person without a lawyer in a civil case. Under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1), however, the court may use its discretion to ask the court’s Pro Bono Panel to consider representing an indigent litigant. The court must first decide whether the person’s position appears likely to have merit. If that threshold is met, the court considers additional factors, including the person’s ability to investigate the facts and present the case without assistance.

Ruling

The court stated that, at that stage of the case, it could not conclude that Mikell’s claims were likely to have merit, although that assessment could change as the litigation progressed. It therefore denied Mikell’s application for appointment of free counsel without prejudice to possible renewal at a later stage. “Without prejudice” means the order did not bar Mikell from making the request again. The Clerk of Court was directed to terminate the motion and requested to mail Mikell a copy of the order. The court also identified the New York Legal Assistance Group as a possible source of advice and provided its telephone number.

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.