Abadi v. NYU Langone Health System
- Ronnie Abrams
- 1:21-cv-11073
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Abadi v. NYU Langone Health System, Judge Gorenstein denied requests to amend, obtain counsel, and pursue discovery.
Aaron Abadi and NYU Langone Health System; the order directly addressed Abadi’s applications to amend the complaint, obtain counsel, and pursue discovery.
What happened
In Abadi v. NYU Langone Health System, Aaron Abadi asked to amend his complaint, obtain appointed counsel, and pursue discovery.
The court denied the motion to amend because, among other reasons, it did not include a copy of the proposed amended complaint. It also denied the request for counsel because the filings did not show that Abadi’s claim was sufficiently substantial to warrant volunteer counsel and the case did not appear too difficult for him to handle. The court denied the discovery application in its present form, but explained what information a new discovery letter must include if the dispute could not be resolved.
United States Magistrate Judge Gabriel W. Gorenstein issued the order on May 16, 2023, and said the court could seek counsel for Abadi later if further review showed that appointment was warranted.
The detailed version
- Abadi v. NYU Langone Health System · No. 1:21-cv-11073
- Ronnie Abrams
- May 16, 2023
Motions to Amend, Obtain Counsel, and Pursue Discovery
Aaron Abadi filed three applications. He sought permission to amend his complaint, a request for counsel, and relief concerning discovery.
Motion to Amend
The court denied the motion to amend. One stated reason was that Abadi did not attach a copy of the proposed amended complaint. The court cited the requirement that a party seeking leave to amend submit a complete proposed amended complaint so the court and the opposing party can understand the exact changes requested.
Request for Counsel
The court denied Abadi’s request for counsel. Applying the factors identified in Cooper v. A. Sargenti Co., the court concluded that the application and other filings did not, at that time, show that Abadi’s claim was likely to be sufficiently substantial to justify seeking volunteer counsel. The court also found that the case was not so difficult that Abadi would be unable to address relevant facts or other issues likely to arise. The court noted that attorney’s fees are available for claims such as Abadi’s, which can make counsel available in cases attorneys consider meritorious. The court stated that it would seek appointment of counsel without another request from Abadi if later review showed that appointment was warranted.
Discovery Application
The court denied the discovery application in its present form. It directed Abadi to review paragraph 2.A of the court’s Individual Practices and directed Abadi and counsel to discuss each disputed request so that Abadi understood counsel’s position. If they could not reach agreement, Abadi could submit a new letter to the magistrate judge as described in the court’s August 30, 2022 order. Any new letter would need to reproduce each discovery request and response verbatim, explain what the parties said during their discussion, and explain why Abadi believed the opposing position was wrong, consistent with Local Civil Rule 37.1.
The court also reminded Abadi that the New York Legal Assistance clinic might be available to provide legal assistance. United States Magistrate Judge Gabriel W. Gorenstein entered the order.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.