Buccola v. Boucher et al

Filing 270

ORDER ADMONISHING Attorney Esther Kang Teixeira and for Carpenter, Rothan & Dumont LLP to Show Cause. The firm is ordered to file a written statement as to why it should not be referred to the Standing Committee under the Local Rules or sanctioned under Rule 11(b) by 10/4/2024. Signed by Judge Nathanael M. Cousins on 9/26/2024. (lmh, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/26/2024)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 10 11 THERESA I. BUCCOLA, United States District Court Northern District of California Plaintiff, 12 v. 13 14 JOSEPH L. BOUCHER, et al., Defendants. 15 Case No. 22-cv-03877-NC ORDER ADMONISHING ATTORNEY ESTHER KANG TEIXEIRA AND FOR CARPENTER, ROTHANS & DUMONT LLP TO SHOW CAUSE Re: ECF 254, 257 16 17 On August 20, 2024, the Court ordered Esther Kang Teixeira, an attorney of record 18 for the Carmel Defendants in this matter, to file a written statement addressing whether she 19 is a member of the bar of the Northern District of California and authorized to practice 20 before the Court. ECF 254. In Teixeira’s declaration filed in response, she admits she was 21 not a member of the bar of the Northern District at the time she filed a Notice of 22 Appearance, and that she was previously unaware that she must be admitted to the Court’s 23 bar before appearing in a matter. ECF 257 ¶¶ 6, 8. Teixeira acknowledges she “failed to 24 exercise due diligence when reading and completing the Appearance of Counsel form” and 25 that she is responsible for her “lack of research, due diligence, and failure to ask a more 26 experienced attorney for guidance on the matter.” ECF ¶¶ 6, 9. 27 The Court admonishes Teixeira for her lack of diligence and attention to detail in 28 signing the Notice of Appearance, in which she attested she was “admitted or otherwise 1 authorized to practice in this court,” and in familiarizing herself with the Local Rules of 2 the Court. See ECF 160; L.R. 11-1(a) (“[A]n attorney must be a member of the bar of this 3 Court to practice in this Court.”). Teixeira’s oversights constituted untruthful and 4 unprofessional conduct of which the Court expressly disapproves. United States District Court Northern District of California 5 However, the Court declines to impose further sanctions on Teixeira. She remedied 6 her error by applying for and becoming admitted to the bar of the Northern District on 7 August 22, 2024—within a week from when Plaintiff first raised the issue. See ECF 257 ¶ 8 8; ECF 249. Although Teixeira’s name should not have appeared on any filings, the Court 9 notes she did not sign any filings on behalf of the Carmel Defendants or appear to argue 10 before the Court. Teixeira further declares she has “had no participation in” or “otherwise 11 done any work” for this matter aside from filing the Notice of Appearance and her 12 declaration. ECF 257 ¶ 7. 13 Nonetheless, the Court orders Carpenter, Rothans & Dumont LLP to show cause as 14 to why it should not be referred to the Court’s Standing Committee on Professional 15 Conduct and otherwise sanctioned under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11(b). See Fed. 16 R. Civ. P. 11(c)(3); L.R. 11-6(a), 11-8. The Court has authority to refer “law corporations 17 and partnerships” to the Standing Committee when it has cause to believe unprofessional 18 “alleged conduct occurs in the course and scope of employment by the corporation or 19 partnership.” L.R. 11-6(a)–(b). “A person who exercises, or pretends to be entitled to 20 exercise, any of the privileges of membership in the bar of this Court, when that person is 21 not entitled to exercise such privileges” engages in unprofessional conduct. L.R. 11-8. 22 Two Carpenter, Rothans & Dumont LLP have now admitted to unauthorized practice 23 before the Court in this matter, raising concerns of an unprofessional pattern and practice. 24 See ECF 241, 254. The firm is therefore ordered to file a written statement showing cause 25 as to why it should not be referred to the Standing Committee under the Local Rules or 26 sanctioned under Rule 11(b) by October 4, 2024. 27 28 2 1 IT IS SO ORDERED. 2 3 4 Dated: September 26, 2024 _____________________________________ NATHANAEL M. COUSINS United States Magistrate Judge 5 6 7 8 9 10 United States District Court Northern District of California 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 3

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?