Azzarmi v. 55 Fulton Market
- George Daniels
- 1:20-cv-06835
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
In Azzarmi v. 55 Fulton Market, Judge Barbara Moses directed the clerk to seek volunteer counsel for Aasir Azzarmi at up to three depositions.
Aasir Azzarmi, the defendants in the defamation action, the upcoming deposition process, and any volunteer lawyer who agrees to make a limited appearance.
What happened
In Azzarmi v. 55 Fulton Market, Aasir Azzarmi’s amended complaint asserts one claim for defamation per se against 55 Fulton Market and its employee, Angel Parma. Azzarmi alleges that Parma falsely accused the plaintiff of theft at the store in front of other customers and employees.
No depositions had occurred. After the court extended the fact-discovery deadline and Azzarmi requested help for upcoming depositions, the court decided that limited legal representation would help with those proceedings.
Judge Barbara Moses directed the clerk to seek a volunteer lawyer for Azzarmi’s upcoming party depositions, limited to no more than three depositions held by videoconference. The order did not guarantee that a lawyer would volunteer, and it stated that Azzarmi should be prepared to proceed without counsel.
The detailed version
- Azzarmi v. 55 Fulton Market · No. 1:20-cv-06835
- George Daniels
- Aug. 3, 2022
Background
Aasir Azzarmi’s amended complaint, as narrowed by the court’s earlier order granting in part the defendants’ motion to dismiss, asserts a single claim for defamation per se against 55 Fulton Market and Angel Parma. The opinion describes 55 Fulton Market as the operator of a grocery store in Manhattan and Parma as its employee. Azzarmi alleges that, while shopping at the store on October 20, 2019, Parma falsely accused the plaintiff of theft in front of other customers and employees. Azzarmi also alleges that various employees later refused to admit the plaintiff to the store.
No depositions had yet taken place. During an August 2, 2022 status conference, the court extended the fact-discovery deadline to October 7, 2022. Azzarmi requested volunteer counsel for the upcoming depositions.
Legal standard
Under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1), a court may ask an attorney to represent a person who cannot afford counsel. In civil cases, the court is not required to provide a lawyer. The court also explained that it may request, but may not compel or formally appoint, an attorney to volunteer. Because volunteer-lawyer time is limited and civil-case representation is unpaid, courts are instructed to seek such assistance sparingly.
Ruling
Judge Barbara Moses directed the Clerk of Court to attempt to locate pro bono counsel for Azzarmi for the limited purpose of representing the plaintiff during upcoming party depositions—no more than three—which would be held by videoconference. Any volunteer lawyer would file a notice of limited appearance and would have no obligations beyond the matters described in the order. The representation would end when counsel filed a notice of completion.
The order stated that volunteer counsel could seek reimbursement of certain out-of-pocket expenses under the court’s Pro Bono Fund. It also warned that there was no guarantee that a lawyer would volunteer in time, or at all, and that Azzarmi should be prepared to conduct the depositions without an attorney if necessary.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.