Anthony Casiano v. The City of New York, et al.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ---------------------------------------------------------------------- X : ANTHONY CASIANO, : : Plaintiff, : 25-CV-5720 (JMF) : -v- : ORDER : THE CITY OF NEW YORK, et al., : : Defendants. : : ---------------------------------------------------------------------- X JESSE M. FURMAN, United States District Judge: On November 24, 2025, Plaintiff submitted an application for counsel. See ECF No. 20.

In determining whether to grant an application for counsel, the Court must consider “the merits of plaintiff’s case, the plaintiff’s ability to pay for private counsel, his efforts to obtain a lawyer, the availability of counsel, and the plaintiff’s ability to gather the facts and deal with the issues if unassisted by counsel.” Cooper v. A. Sargenti Co., Inc., 877 F.2d 170, 172 (2d Cir. 1989) (per curiam). As a threshold matter, in order to qualify for counsel Plaintiff must demonstrate that his claim has substance or a likelihood of success. See Hodge v. Police Officers, 802 F.2d 58, 60-61 (2d Cir. 1986). In reviewing a request for counsel, the Court must be cognizant of the fact that volunteer attorney time is a precious commodity and, thus, should not grant a request for counsel indiscriminately. Cooper, 877 F.2d at 172.

A more fully developed record will be necessary before it can be determined whether Plaintiff’s chances of success warrant his request for counsel. Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that plaintiff’s November 24, 2025 application for counsel is denied without prejudice to renewal at such time as the existence of a potentially meritorious claim may be demonstrated.

The Clerk of the Court is directed to terminate ECF No. 20. As Plaintiff previously consented to receive electronic notice via the ECF system, see ECF No. 3, there is no need to mail a copy of this Order to Plaintiff.

SO ORDERED.

Dated: December 1, 2025 New York, New York SSE RMAN nited States District Judge