Lamar v. Waterbury et al

Filing 42

NOTICE & ORDER: See attached. Signed by Judge Donna F. Martinez on 1/6/12. (Constantine, A.)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT
SOLOMON LAMAR,
Plaintiff,
v.
CITY OF WATERBURY, et al.,
Defendants.

:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:

CASE NO.

3:10cv1390(RNC)

NOTICE
On October 21, 2011, the undersigned held a conference on the
record at which the plaintiff's attorney Daniel DiBartolomeo, the
plaintiff

and

defense

counsel

appeared.

The

subject

of

the

conference was the plaintiff's letter to the court (doc. #39)
regarding his attorney.1
During the conference, the undersigned afforded the plaintiff
time to consider whether he wished to have Attorney DiBartolomeo
continue

to

represent

him.2

The

undersigned

instructed

the

plaintiff to report to her by November 20, 2011 as to how he wished
to proceed but has not heard from the plaintiff. However, after the
conference, Judge Chatigny received an undated letter from the

1

The plaintiff complained that, among other things, Attorney
DiBartolomeo had not returned his phone calls. During the hearing,
Attorney DiBartolomeo stated that he had severed his employment
with his law firm and assumed that counsel from his former firm was
representing the plaintiff.
The docket reflects that Attorney
DiBartolomeo did not file a withdrawal of his appearance and that
no attorney from his former law firm ever filed an appearance on
behalf of the plaintiff.
2

Attorney DiBartolomeo indicated that he would be happy to
continue to represent the plaintiff.

plaintiff stating that his "lawyer will not release [his] file" so
the plaintiff can "search[] for another lawyer."
that he is not equipped to proceed pro se.

He also states

On November 30, 2011,

Attorney DiBartolomeo filed an opposition to the defendants' motion
for summary judgment.3 (Doc. #41.)
At this juncture: (1) the defendants' motion for summary
judgment

is

adjudication;

ripe
and

for
(2)

decision,
Attorney

that

is,

DiBartolomeo

it
has

is
not

ready
moved

for
to

withdraw as counsel and continues to be counsel of record for the
plaintiff.
The Clerk of the Court shall cause a copy of this notice to be
sent to Mr. Lamar, at 107 Chipper Road, Waterbury, CT 06704 and to
Attorney DiBartolomeo, at 203 Circle Drive, Bantam CT 06750.
SO ORDERED at Hartford, Connecticut this 6th day of January,
2012.
___________/s/________________
Donna F. Martinez
United States Magistrate Judge

3

Because this is an electronically filed case, counsel e-filed
his opposition. His papers indicate an address different from that
which appears on the docket. Pursuant to D.Conn.L.Civ.R.
83.2(c)(3), counsel is required to notify the Clerk of the Court of
a change of address.
2