Theodore Gamble-Williams v. City of Boston, et al. - Order on Service and Counsel
Summary
The US District Court for Massachusetts ordered the plaintiff in Theodore Gamble-Williams v. City of Boston, et al. to complete service of an amended complaint by April 12, 2026. The court also directed the plaintiff to file a motion for appointment of counsel by March 31, 2026, if he wishes to seek pro bono representation.
What changed
The US District Court for Massachusetts issued an order in the case of Theodore Gamble-Williams v. City of Boston, et al. (Docket No. 24-10701-PBS). The court previously ordered the pro se plaintiff to complete service of his amended complaint on defendant Margaret Ricard by April 12, 2026. The current order addresses the plaintiff's potential request for appointed counsel, noting that while leave to proceed in forma pauperis was granted, no motion for counsel has been filed.
To proceed with a request for appointed counsel, the plaintiff must file a formal motion by March 31, 2026. The court will consider factors such as the plaintiff's financial status, ability to self-represent, and the complexity of the legal issues. This order clarifies the procedural steps required for the plaintiff to pursue legal representation and sets a deadline for that action.
What to do next
- Plaintiff to file motion for appointment of counsel by March 31, 2026
- Plaintiff to complete service of amended complaint by April 12, 2026
Source document (simplified)
Jump To
Top Caption Trial Court Document
Support FLP
CourtListener is a project of Free
Law Project, a federally-recognized 501(c)(3) non-profit. Members help support our work and get special access to features.
Please become a member today.
March 2, 2026 Get Citation Alerts Download PDF Add Note
Theodore Gamble-Williams v. City of Boston, et al.
District Court, D. Massachusetts
- Citations: None known
- Docket Number: 1:24-cv-10701
Precedential Status: Unknown Status
Trial Court Document
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
Related changes
Source
Classification
Who this affects
Taxonomy
Browse Categories
Get Federal Courts alerts
Weekly digest. AI-summarized, no noise.
Free. Unsubscribe anytime.
Get alerts for this source
We'll email you when D. Massachusetts Opinions publishes new changes.