Rimini v. J.P. Morgan Chase & Co.
- John Cronan
- 1:22-cv-07768
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Rimini v. J.P. Morgan Chase & Co., Judge Cronan denied without prejudice Thomas Rimini’s request for appointed counsel.
Thomas Rimini, who requested that the court appoint an attorney to represent him.
What happened
In Rimini v. J.P. Morgan Chase & Co., Thomas Rimini asked the court to appoint an attorney to represent him. He made the request in a letter submitted on November 2, 2022.
The court said it had to consider the strength of Rimini’s claims, his ability to pay for a private lawyer, his efforts to find a lawyer, whether a lawyer was available, and his ability to handle the case without help. Rimini also had to show that his claims had substance or were likely to succeed.
The court denied Rimini’s request without prejudice, noting particularly that he is himself an attorney. Judge John P. Cronan said Rimini may renew the request if he can later show that he has a potentially meritorious claim.
The detailed version
- Rimini v. J.P. Morgan Chase & Co. · No. 1:22-cv-07768
- John Cronan
- Nov. 7, 2022
Background
On November 2, 2022, Plaintiff Thomas Rimini submitted a letter that included a request for the court to appoint an attorney to represent him in this case.
Legal Standard
The court explained that a request for appointed counsel requires consideration of several factors: the merits of the plaintiff’s case, the plaintiff’s ability to pay for private counsel, efforts to obtain a lawyer, the availability of counsel, and the plaintiff’s ability to gather facts and address the issues without assistance. As a threshold matter, the plaintiff must show that the claim has substance or a likelihood of success. The court also noted that volunteer attorney time is limited and that requests for counsel should not be granted indiscriminately.
Ruling
After reviewing Rimini’s claims under these factors, and particularly because Rimini is himself an attorney, the court denied without prejudice his request for appointed counsel. The order states that Rimini may renew the request when he can demonstrate the existence of a potentially meritorious claim. The court also noted that he may contact the New York Legal Assistance Group, which provides free legal assistance to people representing themselves.
Effect of the Order
The order addresses only Rimini’s request for appointed counsel. It does not state that the underlying case was dismissed or otherwise resolve the defendants’ liability.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.