NACM Tampa, Inc. et al v. Mensh et al

Filing 48

ORDER. See Order for details. Signed by Judge Virginia M. Hernandez Covington on 1/15/2016. (DRW)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
TAMPA DIVISION
NACM TAMPA, INC., et al.,
Plaintiffs,
v.

Case No. 8:15-cv-1776-T-33TGW

ALEXANDER MENSH d/b/a MONSTER
DEMOLITION, et al.,
Defendants.
/
ORDER
This matter comes before the Court sua sponte.

NACM Tampa,

Inc. and NACM Services Corp. initiated this action

against

Defendants Alexander Mensh d/b/a Monster Demolition, Jacqueline
Mensh, Ariela Owens a/k/a Ariela Wagner and Ariela Wagner-Owens,
Sunray

Construction

Notices,

Inc.,

Sunray

Construction

Solutions, LLC, Nationwide Notice, Inc., and Reach Technology,
LLC on July 30, 2015. (Doc. # 1). Sunray Construction Notices,
Inc. was served process on August 5, 2015. (Doc. # 11). Keith
Dennis Skorewicz, Esq. filed a Notice of Appearance on behalf of
Sunray Construction Notices, Inc. on September 3, 2015. (Doc. #
17).
On September 11, 2015, Ariela Owens, Sunray Construction
Notices, Inc., and Sunray Construction Solutions, LLC filed
their Answer and Affirmative Defenses to the Complaint. (Doc. #
29).

Thereafter,

on

October

28,

2015,

Sunray

Construction

Notices, Inc.’s counsel filed a Motion to Withdraw as Counsel

for Sunray Construction Notices, Inc. (Doc. # 43). The Honorable
Judge Thomas G. Wilson, United States Magistrate Judge, to whom
the Motion to Withdraw was referred, entered an Order directing
Sunray Construction Notices, Inc.’s counsel to serve a copy of
the Motion to Withdraw, along with Judge’s Wilson Order, on
Sunray Construction Notices, Inc. (Doc. # 44). Judge Wilson
further directed said counsel to file a notice or certificate of
such

service

with

the

Court.

(Id.).

Counsel

for

Sunray

Construction Notices, Inc. filed the required certificate of
service on November 3, 2015. (Doc. # 45).
Accordingly, on November 19, 2015, Judge Wilson granted the
Motion to Withdraw. (Doc. # 46). The Order granting the Motion
to Withdraw also directed Sunray Construction Notices, Inc. to
file a notice of appearance of new counsel within 30 days. (Id.
at 1). The Order specifically noted, “[i]f no such notice is
filed,

a

default

against

this

corporation

[i.e.,

Sunray

Construction Notices, Inc.,] may occur because a corporation
must be represented by counsel and cannot appear pro se. Local
Rule 2.03(e).” (Id.).
Sunray Construction Notices, Inc. failed to comply with
Judge Wilson’s November 19, 2015, Order. As such, because Sunray
Construction

had

not

filed

a

notice

of

appearance

of

new

counsel, the Court entered an Order on December 23, 2015, that
2

stated, in part, “Sunray Construction Notices, Inc. shall file
a notice of appearance of new counsel by January 5, 2016, in
order to be in compliance with Local Rule 2.03(e). Failure to
file said notice may result in Sunray Construction Notices,
Inc.’s pleadings being stricken.” (Doc. # 47). A review of the
file indicates that as of the date of this Order, Sunray
Construction Notices, Inc. has failed to file the required
notice of appearance of new counsel.
A long line of cases hold that corporate entities may not
appear pro se in this Court. See Palazzo v. Gulf Oil Corp., 764
F.2d 1381, 1385 (11th Cir. 1985)(stating, “[t]he rule is well
established that a corporation is an artificial entity that can
act only through agents, cannot appear pro se, and must be
represented by counsel”); Textron Fin. Corp. v. RV Having Fun
Yet, Inc., No. 3:09-cv-2-J-34TEM, 2010 WL 1038503, at *6 (M.D.
Fla.

Mar.

19,

2010)(stating,

“a

corporation’s

financial

constraints do not excuse the requirement that it have legal
representation

in

Court

proceedings”);

United

States

v.

Hagerman, 545 F.3d 579, 581-82 (7th Cir. 2008)(stating, “[p]ro
se litigation is a burden on the judiciary, and the burden is
not to be borne when the litigant has chosen to do business in
entity

form.

He

must

take

the

burdens

with

the

benefits”)(internal citations omitted); see also Local Rule
3

2.03(e), M.D. Fla.
Accordingly, the Court directs Sunray Construction Notices,
Inc. to obtain counsel by February 1, 2016.

Failure to do so

will result in an Order sua sponte striking Sunray Construction
Notices,
Inc.’s

Inc.’s

pleadings

pleadings.
are

If

Sunray

stricken,

NACM

Construction
Tampa,

Inc.

Notices,
and

NACM

Services Corp. may file an application for the entry of Clerk’s
Default. If and when a Clerk’s Default is entered against Sunray
Construction Notices, Inc., NACM Tampa, Inc. and NACM Services
Corp. may promptly move for entry of default judgment as to
Sunray Construction Notices, Inc.
Accordingly, it is
ORDERED, ADJUDGED, and DECREED:
Sunray Construction Notices, Inc. has until and including
February 1, 2016, to retain counsel.

Absent a notice of

appearance of counsel filed on behalf of Sunray Construction
Notices, Inc. by February 1, 2016, this Court will sua sponte
strike Sunray Construction Notices, Inc.’s pleadings because
corporate entities are not authorized to appear pro se before
this Court.

4

DONE and ORDERED in Chambers, in Tampa, Florida, this 15th
day of January, 2016.

Copies: All Counsel and Parties of Record

5