Sinclair et al v. Fox Hollow, et al

Filing 679

ORDER requiring further briefing signed by Magistrate Judge Dennis L. Beck on 7/12/2011. ( Filing Deadline: 7/25/2011).(Lundstrom, T)

1
2
3
4
5
6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
8
9

FOX HOLLOW OF TURLOCK
OWNERS’ASSOCIATION, et al.,

10
11
12
13

Plaintiffs,
v.
RICHARD SINCLAIR, et al.,

14
15

Defendants.

) 1:03cv5439 OWW DLB
)
)
)
) ORDER REQUIRING
) FURTHER BRIEFING
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

16
17

On June 6, 2011, Plaintiffs/Defendants/Cross-Defendants Fox Hollow of Turlock

18

Owners’ Association, California Equity Management Group, Inc., and Andrew Katakis filed a

19

motion to compel against Defendants Mauctrst, LLC, Lairtrust, LLC, and Capstone, LLC. The

20

motion was withdrawn as to Mauctrst, LLC. According to the certificate of service, the motion

21

was served on Defendant Brandon Sinclair, “c/o Law Offices of Richard C. Sinclair.”

22

On June 8, 2011, this Court granted Steven Stoker’s motion to withdraw as counsel for

23

Mauctrst, LLC, Capstone, LLC and Lairtrust, LLC. The Court ordered the entities to file proof

24

of attorney representation within 10 days. On June 17, 2011, Douglas Thornton filed a notice of

25

appearance on behalf of Mauctrst, LLC. Neither Capstone, LLC, nor Lairtrust, LLC, have

26

provided proof of representation.

27

On June 24, 2011, Defendant Richard Sinclair, who is representing himself pro se in this

28

action, filed an opposition to the motion to compel purportedly on behalf of Capstone, LLC, and
1

1

Lairtrust, LLC. The caption states that he is “specially appearing” on behalf of Capstone, LLC,

2

and “appearing” on behalf of Lairtrust, LLC.1

3

This Court has previously cautioned Mr. Sinclair against representing other Defendants in

4

this action. On February 8, 2010, in granting a prior motion to withdraw as attorney of record for

5

Capstone, LLC, and Lairtrust, LLC, the Court stated:

6
7

Mr. Sinclair shall not represent any of the Defendants in the within action other
than himself, individually, and other than a non-individual Defendant in which he is and
at all times has been the sole owner.

8

Therefore, it is not clear who, if anyone, is properly acting on behalf of Defendants

9

Capstone, LLC, and Lairtrust, LLC, and received notice of this motion. Accordingly, the Court

10

orders the parties to submit further briefing to address this issue within ten (10) days of service of

11

this order. If Mr. Sinclair contends that he is qualified to represent the entities in this matter, his

12

additional briefing should address this issue.

13
14

IT IS SO ORDERED.

15

Dated:

July 12, 2011

/s/ Dennis L. Beck
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

1

The caption also states that he is “specially appearing for Plaintiff Mauctrst, LLC if not answered by new
counsel.” Mr. Sinclair is not attorney of record for Mauctrst and has no authority to appear on its behalf. The Court
cautions Mr. Sinclair against attempts to appear on behalf of Mauctrst in the future.

2