Genao v. City of New York
- Ona Wang
- 1:20-cv-10573
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
In Genao v. City of New York, Judge Wang granted Genao’s request for counsel in his civil-rights case.
Gabino Genao is affected because the court granted his request for counsel and directed the Pro Se Office to seek a volunteer lawyer. The order also concerns any lawyer who may volunteer to represent him.
What happened
Gabino Genao v. City of New York concerns allegations that Rikers Island personnel exposed Genao to unsafe cell conditions, retaliated against him, and arranged a fight with another detainee. He brought claims under a federal civil-rights law against the defendants.
Genao previously received limited-scope volunteer counsel, but that representation ended. Afterward, while representing himself, he asked the court to appoint counsel for all purposes.
Judge Ona T. Wang granted Genao’s request and directed the court’s Pro Se Office to seek a volunteer lawyer. The order warned that there could be a long delay, that no volunteer might accept the case, and that Genao might have to continue without counsel.
The detailed version
- Genao v. City of New York · No. 1:20-cv-10573
- Ona Wang
- June 15, 2023
Background
Gabino Genao, who was representing himself, was a pretrial detainee at Rikers Island. He alleged that he was placed in a cell containing mouse droppings and an oil leak in the ceiling that produced burning fumes, headaches, and dizziness. He further alleged that, after he complained to prison staff, Rikers personnel retaliated by moving him to a cell next to a rival gang member and orchestrating a physical fight. According to Genao, corrections officers stopped the fight with chemical agents, handcuffed him, left him in the housing area, and delayed taking him for medical treatment.
Genao pursued claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a federal law allowing claims for violations of constitutional rights by state or local officials, including claims that defendants failed to properly train and supervise officers.
Request for Counsel
The court had previously granted Genao’s request for limited-scope counsel. Counsel from Willkie Farr & Gallagher LLP assisted him with depositions, and that representation ended on May 31, 2023. Genao then requested appointment of counsel for all purposes.
The court explained that it considers the apparent substance or likely success of the claims, the person’s ability to pay for a private lawyer, efforts to obtain counsel, the availability of counsel, and the person’s ability to investigate facts and handle the case without assistance. The court stated that a claimant must first show that the claims have substance or a likelihood of success.
Ruling
Judge Ona T. Wang found that Genao had alleged serious and substantive § 1983 violations involving mistreatment and retaliation by correction officers. The court also noted that he was incarcerated, unable to afford counsel, and had limited ability to investigate facts needed to pursue the claims.
The court therefore granted Genao’s request for counsel for all purposes. It further ordered the Pro Se Office to seek an appearance by pro bono counsel. The court explained that civil cases have no funds for retaining counsel and that volunteer lawyers may take substantial time to become available. It also stated that no volunteer lawyer was guaranteed to accept the case and that Genao would have to continue representing himself if none did.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.