Tronchin v. The Shubert Organization Inc.
- Analisa Torres
- 1:23-cv-10053
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 5
In Tronchin v. Shubert, Judge Torres ordered service of the complaint but denied without prejudice the request for volunteer counsel.
Anthony Tronchin may proceed with service through the U.S. Marshals Service and may submit another request for volunteer counsel later; The Shubert Organization Inc., Kenny Nunez, Michael Coco, and Cathy Cozens are to be served with the complaint.
What happened
In Tronchin v. The Shubert Organization Inc., Anthony Tronchin, representing himself, sued his former employer and three employees over alleged employment discrimination and retaliation, along with other claims. The court had already allowed him to proceed without prepaying filing fees.
The court ordered the Clerk to issue summonses and prepare service paperwork, and directed the U.S. Marshals Service to serve the defendants. The court said Tronchin must ask for more time if service is not completed within 90 days after the summonses are issued, and must notify the court of any address change.
Judge Analisa Torres denied Tronchin’s request for the court to seek volunteer legal counsel without prejudice, because the case was too early for the court to evaluate the merits. The order allows him to file another counsel request later in the case.
The detailed version
- Tronchin v. The Shubert Organization Inc. · No. 1:23-cv-10053
- Analisa Torres
- Jan. 2, 2024
Background
Anthony Tronchin, proceeding without a lawyer, sued The Shubert Organization Inc. and Kenny Nunez, Michael Coco, and Cathy Cozens. The opinion states that Tronchin alleged discrimination based on race, color, sex, and age, and retaliation. The court construed the complaint as raising employment-discrimination and retaliation claims under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and 42 U.S.C. § 1981; retaliation claims under the Fair Labor Standards Act and New York Labor Law § 215; employment-discrimination and retaliation claims under the New York State Human Rights Law and New York City Human Rights Law; and defamation claims. He sought several forms of relief, including reinstatement, promotion, lost wages, damages, and other payments.
The court had previously allowed Tronchin to proceed without prepaying filing fees. In this order, it addressed service of the defendants and Tronchin’s request that the court seek volunteer legal counsel.
Service of the Defendants
Because Tronchin was allowed to proceed without prepaying fees, the court directed the Clerk of Court to issue a summons for each defendant, complete a U.S. Marshals Service Process Receipt and Return form for each defendant, and provide the necessary documents to the U.S. Marshals Service. The Marshals Service was to serve each defendant with the summons and a copy of the complaint.
The court stated that if service was not completed within 90 days after the summonses were issued, Tronchin should request an extension of time. It also required him to notify the court in writing if his address changed and stated that the case could be dismissed if he failed to do so.
Request for Volunteer Counsel
The court considered factors including the apparent merits of the case, efforts to obtain a lawyer, and the litigant’s ability to gather facts and present the case without assistance. It explained that the court cannot appoint a free lawyer under the applicable statute, but may ask an attorney to volunteer.
Because the case was at an early stage and the court could not yet assess the merits, Judge Analisa Torres denied Tronchin’s application for the court to request volunteer counsel without prejudice to filing another application later in the same action.
Disposition
The court ordered the Clerk to issue summonses and provide the service materials to the U.S. Marshals Service. It denied Tronchin’s application for the court to request volunteer counsel without prejudice.
Read the full 5-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.