Binns-Harty-Bolt v. McDonough

Background

Rinella Binns-Harty-Bolt brought a discrimination action against Denis R. McDonough, identified in the caption as Secretary of the Department of Veterans Affairs. Binns-Harty-Bolt alleges that she worked as a social worker at the New York Harbor Medical Centre, operated by the Veterans Administration. According to her Third Amended Complaint, she was demoted after returning from an extended disability leave in February 2015, denied a promotion in July 2015, and terminated in November 2017. She alleges that these actions retaliated against her for exercising federally protected rights, including filing discrimination claims with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. She also alleges a hostile work environment based on her origin as a native of Jamaica and contends that a promotion decision was based on race and age. The opinion states that she seeks relief under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

Request for Limited Pro Bono Counsel

Written discovery had been exchanged, but no depositions had occurred. At a May 13, 2024 status conference, Binns-Harty-Bolt requested volunteer legal assistance for the fact depositions she wished to conduct. The court had limited fact depositions to six per side.

The court directed the Clerk to seek a volunteer lawyer for a limited appearance on Binns-Harty-Bolt’s behalf. The representation would cover no more than six upcoming fact depositions, which could take place by videoconference. The lawyer would not be responsible for any other part of the case, including representing Binns-Harty-Bolt at her own deposition or defending fact depositions conducted by McDonough. The representation would end when the volunteer lawyer filed a Notice of Completion.

The court explained that federal law allows a court to request a lawyer to represent someone who cannot afford counsel, but does not generally require courts to provide lawyers in civil cases. The court also stated that it can request, but not compel, a lawyer to volunteer and that courts must use volunteer attorney time sparingly. The court extended Binns-Harty-Bolt’s deadline for conducting fact depositions without setting a new date, anticipating a possible positive response to the request. Volunteer counsel could seek reimbursement of certain out-of-pocket expenses under the court’s Pro Bono Fund rules.

Ruling and Effect

The court directed the Clerk to attempt to locate pro bono counsel for the limited deposition-related purpose described in the order. It did not decide the merits of Binns-Harty-Bolt’s discrimination claims. The court emphasized that there was no guarantee that an attorney would volunteer in time—or at all—and that Binns-Harty-Bolt should be prepared to conduct the depositions without a lawyer if necessary.