Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Aug. 24, 2023

Steele v. Capital One Bank

Judge
Andrew Carter
Docket
1:23-cv-03745
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil Procedure
In one sentence

In Steele v. Capital One Bank, Judge Carter denied Beatrice Shirley Williams Steele’s request for volunteer counsel because her position did not appear substantial.

Who this affects

Beatrice Shirley Williams Steele, whose application for court-requested volunteer counsel was denied.

What happened

In Steele v. Capital One Bank, Beatrice Shirley Williams Steele asked the court to request a volunteer lawyer to represent her in this civil case.

The court said that civil litigants do not automatically receive lawyers. Although Steele had shown that she could not afford counsel by being allowed to proceed without paying court fees, the court found that she had not shown that her legal position was likely to have merit.

Judge Andrew L. Carter, Jr. denied Steele’s application for the court to request counsel and directed the clerk to close the motion and mail her a copy of the order.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Steele v. Capital One Bank · No. 1:23-cv-03745
Judge
Andrew Carter
Date
Aug. 24, 2023

Background

Beatrice Shirley Williams Steele submitted a request for pro bono counsel, meaning a request that the court seek a volunteer attorney to represent her. The request was docketed as ECF No. 4.

Legal standard

The court explained that civil litigants are not automatically entitled to counsel, unlike people facing criminal charges. Courts have broad discretion when deciding whether to request volunteer representation, and they cannot appoint counsel or pay an attorney in a civil case.

Under the framework used by the Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, the court first considers whether the person seeking counsel is indigent, meaning unable to afford an attorney. Steele satisfied that requirement because she had successfully applied to proceed without paying court fees. The court then had to determine whether her legal position appeared likely to have substance.

Ruling

The court found that Steele had not met the requirement of showing that her position was likely to have substance. Judge Andrew L. Carter, Jr. therefore denied her application for the court to request counsel. The clerk was respectfully requested to close the motion at ECF No. 4 and mail Steele a copy of the order.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.