Court Appoints Pro Bono Counsel for Pro Se Plaintiff in Elder Abuse Case, Finding it Within the Court’s Discretion To Do So
Daspin v. Daspin, Case No. 2:24-cv-11501, 2025 WL 3251442 (D.N.J. Nov. 21, 2025)
The plaintiff was 86 years old, hearing impaired, and on several prescriptions. As a pro se party, he filed various pleadings alleging elder abuse by his nephew and the nephew’s girlfriend. The alleged abuse covered a number of areas, including financial exploitation and even the wrongful taking of his dog.
The defendants denied the allegations. However, while in his pleadings the nephew admitted that he was the agent under a power of attorney for the plaintiff, the nephew later admitted he did not actually have a signed power of attorney for his uncle. The nephew also asserted that he supported his uncle for five years.
The court was concerned about the plaintiff’s ability to manage the litigation given his age, hearing impairment, and apparent inability to understand basic court procedures. The court acknowledged that normally a party does not have the right to counsel in a civil case. However, the court Tabron v. Grace, 6 F.3d 147 (3d Cir. 1993) as authority to appoint pro bono counsel in the judge’s discretion in weighing a number of factors. Here, the court found that the plaintiff’s claims might have merit, affording the plaintiff the benefit of the doubt for the issue at hand. Those claims included that the nephew took advantage of the plaintiff’s advanced age, poor health, and potential senility. The court also cited among other factors that the plaintiff lacked the ability to effectively present his case without legal assistance. As a result, the court appointed pro bono counsel for the plaintiff.