Mombrun v. The New York Hotel Pension Fund
- Paul Gardephe
- 1:22-cv-04970
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 4
In Mombrun v. The New York Hotel Pension Fund, Magistrate Judge Cott denied Marie Mombrun’s request for appointed counsel without prejudice and ordered a status report.
Marie S. Mombrun’s request for appointed counsel was denied without prejudice; the parties were also directed to submit a further status report.
What happened
In Mombrun v. The New York Hotel Pension Fund, Marie Mombrun, who was representing herself, asked the court to appoint a lawyer because of the cost and difficulty of litigation.
The court explained that it could not pay for a lawyer in a civil case or require one to work without pay. It also said that a person seeking appointed counsel must first show some likelihood that the claims have merit. Based on the current record, the court could not conclude that Mombrun’s claims were substantial or likely to succeed.
Magistrate Judge James L. Cott denied Mombrun’s request for appointed counsel without prejudice to renewing it. The court referred her to a free legal clinic and directed the parties to submit a further status report by September 30, 2023.
The detailed version
- Mombrun v. The New York Hotel Pension Fund · No. 1:22-cv-04970
- Paul Gardephe
- Aug. 7, 2023
Background
Marie S. Mombrun, proceeding without a lawyer, asked the court to appoint counsel in her civil case against The New York Hotel Pension Fund. She said in a letter that she wanted to continue with the case but needed help obtaining a lawyer because of the costs and difficulty of litigation.
Legal standard
The court stated that it had no budget to pay appointed counsel in civil cases and no power to require a lawyer to serve without pay. It further explained that a person seeking appointed counsel must first make a threshold showing of some likelihood of merit. Only after that showing may the court consider additional factors, including the person’s ability to investigate important facts and present the case, the complexity of the legal issues, and whether appointing counsel would more likely lead to a fair determination.
Ruling
The court denied Mombrun’s application for appointment of counsel without prejudice to renewal. It said that, based on the current record, it could not conclude that her claims were substantial or that she was likely to succeed on the merits.
Other directions
The court directed Mombrun to the New York Legal Assistance Group’s Clinic for Pro Se Litigants, a free legal clinic operated by a private organization rather than by the court. The court clarified that the clinic could provide limited assistance but could not file documents for a self-represented party. The court also directed the parties to provide a further status report by September 30, 2023. Magistrate Judge James L. Cott signed the order.
Read the full 4-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.