Hancock Bank v. Bright Lake Estates, L.L.C. et al

Filing 20

ORDER granting 13 Plaintiff Hancock Bank's Motion to Strike Defendant Bright Lake Estates, LLC's Answer to Complaint and Affirmative Defenses. Signed by Magistrate Judge Philip R. Lammens on 3/8/2013. (AR)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
OCALA DIVISION
HANCOCK BANK, a Mississippi
banking corporation
Plaintiff,
v.

Case No:5:12-CV-649-Oc-10PRL

BRIGHT LAKE ESTATES, L.L.C.,
RANDALL B. LANGLEY, MATTHEW
A. SEIBEL, KNIGHT ENGINEERING
CONSULTANTS, INC. and
CLEARWATER RESERVE HOME
OWNERS ASSOCIATION INC.
Defendants.

ORDER
This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff Hancock Bank’s Motion to Strike Defendant
Bright Lake Estates, LLC’s Answer to Complaint and Affirmative Defenses (With Jury
Demand). (Doc. 13). Bright Lake Estates, LLC has not filed a response.
In its Motion, Plaintiff seeks to strike the Answer filed by Bright Lake Estates, LLC
(Doc. 8) because it is signed by Richard H. Langley, Esquire. Mr. Langley was previously
removed as counsel of record because he is not admitted to practice in this Court. See Doc. 10.
This leaves Bright Lake Estates, LLC unrepresented and pursuant to Local Rule 2.03, limited
liability companies may appear and be heard only through counsel admitted to practice in this
Court. Energy Lighting Management, LLC v. Kinder, 363 F.Supp.2d 1331, 1332 (M.D. Fla.
2005).
On February 15, 2013, the Court entered its Order deferring ruling on the Motion to give
Bright Lake Estates, LLC an opportunity to retain counsel. (Doc. 18). The Court directed:

[O or befor February 28, 2013, Bright Lake Estates, LLC shall retai counsel w is
O]n
re
y
B
C
in
who
ad
dmitted to practice in this Court and such co unsel shall file a notic of appear
p
t
a
ce
rance.
Failure to do so, will re
o
esult in the Bright Lake Estates, LL
B
e
LC’s Answe being stricken
er
without furthe notice.
w
er

To date, coun has not filed a noti of appea
T
nsel
t
ice
arance on be
ehalf of Brig Lake Es
ght
states,
LLC and Bright Lake Estates, LL has not filed anythin in respons to Plaintif Motion o the
d
e
LC
f
ng
se
ff’s
or
Court February 15, 2013 Order.
2
Accordingly, because Bri
A
ight Lake Es
states, LLC c
cannot proce unrepres
eed
sented, Plain
ntiff’s
Motion (Doc. 13) is due to be GRANTED and its Ans
(
G
swer is due to be strick
ken. The An
nswer
filed on behalf of Defendants, Bright Lake Estates, LL and Ran
D
B
e
LC
ndall B. Lan
ngley (Doc. 8) is
STRICK
KEN as to Br
right Lake Estates, LLC.
E
DONE and ORDERED in Ocala, Flo
D
O
orida on Ma
arch 8, 2013.
.

Copies fu
urnished to:
Counsel of Record
sented Partie
es
Unrepres

-2-