Theodore Gamble-Williams v. City of Boston, et al.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS

THEODORE GAMBLE-WILLIAMS, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) Civil Action v. ) No. 24-10701-PBS ) CITY OF BOSTON, et al., ) ) Defendants. ) ORDER March 2, 2026 SARIS, D.J.

On February 2, 2026, the Court ordered plaintiff, who is proceeding pro se, to complete service of the amended complaint on defendant Margaret Ricard by April 12, 2026. (Doc. No. 48).

Pursuant to the in forma pauperis statute, the Court “may request an attorney to represent any person unable to afford counsel.” 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1). The allowance of a motion to appoint counsel does not mean that the litigant is guaranteed appointment of pro bono counsel. Rather, it means that the Court will, pursuant to the Court’s Plan for Appointment of Counsel for Indigent Parties in Civil Cases, contact those attorneys who have expressed interest in representing litigants without compensation.

Here, plaintiff has already been granted leave to proceed in forma pauperis. However, he has not moved for appointment of counsel. In considering whether to grant a party’s request for counsel, the Court considers the party’s financial status, ability to represent himself, the complexity of the legal issues, and the totality of circumstances. See DesRosiers v. Moran, 949 F.2d 15, 23-24 (1st Cir. 1991).

To the extent plaintiff seeks to have this Court appoint counsel in this case, he shall, on or before March 31, 2026, file a motion for appointment of counsel.

SO ORDERED. /s/ Patti B. Saris _________ PATTI B. SARIS UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE