Devita v. Mount Sinai Hospital
- Laura Swain
- 1:22-cv-09826
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Devita v. Mount Sinai Hospital, Judge Broderick ordered service, denied counsel without prejudice, and denied fee-free appeal status.
Sabrina Devita, the five named defendants, and Devita's request for pro bono counsel and fee-free appeal status.
What happened
In Devita v. Mount Sinai Hospital, Sabrina Devita paid the filing fee and is proceeding without a lawyer. The court directed the Clerk to issue summonses for Mount Sinai Hospital, Mardisa Samson Ramon, Celia Wells, Sonia Nelson, and Jeff Cohen.
Devita must serve each defendant within 90 days after the summonses are issued or request more time. If she does neither, the court may dismiss the claims for failure to prosecute. The court also considered her request for pro bono counsel but said it was too early to assess the case's merits.
Judge Vernon S. Broderick denied the request for pro bono counsel without prejudice to renewal later. The court also stated that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied fee-free status for an appeal.
The detailed version
- Devita v. Mount Sinai Hospital · No. 1:22-cv-09826
- Laura Swain
- Jan. 11, 2023
Background
Sabrina Devita paid the filing fee to begin the action and is proceeding without a lawyer. The defendants named in the order are Mount Sinai Hospital, Mardisa Samson Ramon, Celia Wells, Sonia Nelson, and Jeff Cohen.
Service of process
The court directed the Clerk of Court to issue summonses for each named defendant and to mail Devita an information package. Devita must serve the summons and complaint on each defendant within 90 days after the summonses are issued. If she does not serve the defendants or request an extension within that period, the court stated that it may dismiss the claims under Rules 4 and 41 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure for failure to prosecute, meaning failure to move the case forward.
Request for counsel
Devita applied for the court to request pro bono counsel, meaning a lawyer who would represent her without charging her. The court identified the relevant factors as the case's merits, her efforts to obtain a lawyer, and her ability to gather facts and present the case without assistance. Because the proceedings were at an early stage and the court could not yet assess the merits, it denied the application without prejudice to renewal later.
Appeal-related ruling
The court certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that an appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith. It therefore denied fee-free status for purposes of an appeal.
Disposition
The court ordered issuance of summonses and mailing of the information package, denied Devita's application for pro bono counsel without prejudice to renewal later, and denied fee-free status for an appeal.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.