Fenton v. Nerber et al, No. 6:2012cv06380 - Document 23 (W.D.N.Y. 2012)

Court Description: DECISION & ORDER denying without prejudice 18 Motion to Appoint Counsel. It is plaintiff responsibility to retain an attorney or press forward with this lawsuit pro se. Signed by Hon. Marian W. Payson on 12/17/2012. (KAH)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK TONJA FENTON, DECISION & ORDER Plaintiff, 12-CV-6380P v. SERGEANT NERBER, et al, Defendants. On November 9, 2012, pro se plaintiff Tonja Fenton ( plaintiff ) filed an amended complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 alleging, inter alia, that defendants failed to protect her from threats to her health and safety in violation of the Eighth Amendment and that defendants retaliated against her for filing grievances and a lawsuit in violation of the First and Fourteenth Amendments. (Docket # 20). Currently before this Court is plaintiff s third motion for the appointment of counsel. (Docket # 18). Plaintiff s previous motions for appointment of counsel were denied on the grounds that issue had yet to be joined, and, therefore, there was insufficient information before the Court to make the necessary assessment of plaintiff s claims under the standards promulgated by Hendricks v. Couglin, 114 F.3d 390, 392 (2d Cir. 1997), and Hodge v. Police Officers, 802 F.2d 58 (2d Cir. 1986). (Docket ## 8, 13). There continues to be insufficient information before the Court to make an assessment of plaintiff s claims because issue has not yet been joined in this case as defendants time to respond to plaintiff s complaint has been extended to January 11, 2012. (Docket # 15). It is therefore the Decision and Order of this Court that plaintiff s motion for the appointment of counsel (Docket # 18) is DENIED without prejudice at this time. It is the plaintiff s responsibility to retain an attorney or press forward with this lawsuit pro se. 28 U.S.C. § 1654. IT IS SO ORDERED. s/Marian W. Payson MARIAN W. PAYSON United States Magistrate Judge Dated: Rochester, New York December 17 , 2012 2

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.