UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY
November 24, 2009
PRINCE A.Z.K. ADEKOYA II PLAINTIFF,
MICHAEL CHERTOFF, ET AL., DEFENDANT.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Patty Shwartz United States Magistrate Judge
ORDER ON INFORMAL APPLICATION
This matter having come before the Court by way of Plaintiff's first request for the appointment of pro bono counsel filed on October 9, 2009;*fn1 and the Court having considered Plaintiff's application; and the Court noting that it has broad discretion under 28 U.S.C. § 1915 to appoint pro bono counsel to represent indigent litigants; see Parham v. Johnson 126 F.3d 454, 456--57 (3d Cir. 1997); and it appearing that a court may grant a properly filed application for the appointment of pro bono counsel if Plaintiff's claims have some "merit in fact and law," Montgomery v. Pinchak, 294 F.3d 492, 499 (3d Cir. 2002), and upon consideration of the following non- exhaustive list of factors:
1. the plaintiff's ability to present his own case;
2. the difficulty of the particular legal issues;
3. the degree to which factual investigation will be necessary and the ability of the plaintiff to pursue investigation;
4. the plaintiff's capacity to retain counsel on his own behalf;
5. the extent to which a case is likely to turn on credibility determinations; and
6. whether the case will require testimony from expert witnesses, id.; Tabron v. Grace, 6 F.3d 147, 158 (3d Cir. 1993) (also known as the Tabron factors); and the Court assuming for the purposes of this application that Plaintiff's claims are meritorious; and the Court having considered the Tabron factors and finding that pro bono counsel is not warranted;*fn2
IT IS on this 24th day of November, 2009
ORDERED that Plaintiff's request for the appointment of pro bono counsel is denied.
Accordingly, at this early point in the litigation, the record does not support appointment of counsel for Plaintiff under Tabron.