Guo v. Perry
- Paul Engelmayer
- 1:23-cv-00119
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
In Guo v. Perry, Judge Engelmayer ordered service information and denied Guo’s request for counsel without prejudice.
Lun Guo must provide an address where Marjorie Mae Perry can be served within 30 days. Guo’s request for counsel was denied without prejudice, and the court denied fee-free status for an appeal.
What happened
In Guo v. Perry, Lun Guo, who is representing himself, brought a state-law conversion claim against Marjorie Mae Perry based on diversity jurisdiction. Guo had permission to proceed without paying filing fees.
Because Guo had that permission, the court said the U.S. Marshals Service would serve Perry, but Guo had not provided an address where Perry could be served. The court ordered Guo to provide that address within 30 days.
Judge Paul A. Engelmayer denied Guo’s request for appointed counsel without prejudice because the case was too early for the court to assess its merits. The court said it would dismiss the action without prejudice if Guo did not provide the address and could not show good cause for failing to do so, and denied fee-free status for any appeal.
The detailed version
- Guo v. Perry · No. 1:23-cv-00119
- Paul Engelmayer
- Jan. 24, 2023
Background
Lun Guo, appearing without a lawyer, brought a state-law conversion claim against Marjorie Mae Perry based on diversity jurisdiction. The court had already granted Guo permission to proceed without paying filing fees.
Service of the Complaint
A plaintiff proceeding without paying filing fees may rely on the court and the U.S. Marshals Service to serve the defendant. Guo, however, had not provided an address where Perry could be served. The opinion states that Guo listed only that Perry resides in Illinois.
The court ordered Guo to provide, within 30 days, an address where Perry could be served. After receiving that information, the court would direct the issuance of a summons and service by the Marshals Service. The court also instructed Guo to notify it in writing of any address change. It stated that, if Guo failed to provide the service address within the allowed time and could not show good cause for the failure, the action would be dismissed without prejudice.
Request for Counsel
Guo also asked the court to request or appoint counsel. The court explained that it considers factors including the apparent merits of the case, the plaintiff’s efforts to obtain a lawyer, and the plaintiff’s ability to investigate and present the case without assistance. Because the case was at an early stage and the court could not yet assess its merits, the court denied the request for counsel without prejudice to renewal later. The Clerk was directed to terminate the motion on the docket.
Disposition
The court denied fee-free status for an appeal, certifying that an appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith. Judge Paul A. Engelmayer did not decide the merits of the conversion claim in this order.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.