Jones v. Social Security Administration
- Andrew Carter
- 1:22-cv-09786
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Jones v. Social Security Administration, Judge Carter denied Dorothy Jones’s request for pro bono counsel without prejudice and ordered a response to summary judgment.
Dorothy Jones, who sought appointed counsel and was directed to respond to the pending summary-judgment motion; the defendant’s motion remained unresolved.
What happened
In Jones v. Social Security Administration, Dorothy Jones asked the court to appoint a free lawyer to represent her. The court said it was too early to evaluate the merits of her case.
The court also noted that a defendant had filed a motion for summary judgment and that Jones had not responded. It directed her to respond by September 30, 2023, and warned that failing to respond could lead the court to treat the motion as unopposed.
Judge Andrew L. Carter, Jr. denied Jones’s request for appointed counsel without prejudice, meaning she may be able to renew the request later. The order did not decide the summary-judgment motion.
The detailed version
- Jones v. Social Security Administration · No. 1:22-cv-09786
- Andrew Carter
- Aug. 1, 2023
Background
Dorothy Jones, proceeding without a lawyer, applied for the appointment of pro bono counsel at ECF No. 3. The court identified three factors relevant to such a request: the apparent merits of the case, the plaintiff’s efforts to obtain a lawyer, and the plaintiff’s ability to gather facts and present the case without assistance. The court stated that the merits factor receives the most attention.
Other Pending Motion
The order states that a defendant filed a motion for summary judgment on February 27, 2023, at ECF Nos. 9 and 10. Jones had not submitted a response by the date of the order. The court directed her to file a response by September 30, 2023, and advised that failing to respond would result in the motion being treated as unopposed.
Ruling
Because the proceeding was at an early stage and the court could not yet assess the merits, the court DENIED Jones’s request for appointment of pro bono counsel without prejudice. The Clerk was directed to terminate the pending motion at ECF No. 3 and mail the order to Jones. The order did not rule on the motion for summary judgment.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.