Jefferies et al v. Sunrise Hotel Corporation et al

Filing 42

ORDER granting 39 Motion for Limited Appearance. Order resetting reply deadline for May 18, 2009 for Defendants' reply in support of 31 Motion. Signed by Judge James I. Cohn on 5/11/2009. (lc1)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. 08-61132-CIV-COHN COLLETTE M.A. JEFFRIES and LAWRENCE T. JEFFRIES, as husband and wife, Plaintiffs, vs. SUNRISE HOTEL CORPORATION, d/b/a SUNRISE HILTON HOTEL, SANDCASTLE RESORTS AND HOTELS LTD., d/b/a SUNRISE HILTON HOTELS, LEISURE COLONY MANAGEMENT, d/b/a SUNRISE HILTON HOTEL, ISSAC FAGAN, HANNAH PHILLIPS, and BEVERLY YOUNG, Defendants. _________________________________________/ ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR LEAVE TO APPEAR PRO SE AND PRO HAC VICE ORDER RESETTING DEADLINE FOR REPLY IN SUPPORT OF TO MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT THIS CAUSE is before the Court upon Plaintiff Laurance Jeffries' Motion for Leave to Appear Pro Se and as Retained Lawyer for Colette M.A. Jeffries [DE 39] and a review of the docket. The Court has carefully considered the motion, and is otherwise fully advised in the premises. No response was received to Plaintiffs' Motion for Leave to Appear by the response deadline of May 1, 2009. On April 1, 2009, this Court granted Plaintiffs' co-counsels' motion to withdraw from representation of the Plaintiffs due to an irreconcilable dispute and conflict [DE 38]. The Court stated that Plaintiffs, as individuals, may represent themselves or obtain new counsel, and extended Plaintiffs' deadline to respond to the pending motion for summary judgment until April 30, 2009. Magistrate Judge Seltzer Plaintiff Laurance Jeffries filed the instant motion to appear pro se and to represent his wife pro hac vice, as Mr. Jeffries is an attorney in good standing in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois. Defendants have not responded to the motion. The Court concludes that it will grant the motion and allow Mr. Jeffries, an attorney, to represent himself and his wife, and waive the local counsel requirement for this case only. The Response to Defendants' motion for summary judgment [DE 40] is deemed accepted. Mr. Jeffries will be allowed to file in the conventional manner (i.e. by mail to Clerk of Court in Fort Lauderdale) and be served in the conventional manner, unless Mr. Jeffries consents to service by email, which this Court will allow if that manner of service is affirmatively requested by Mr. Jeffries in writing. Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows: 1. Plaintiff Laurance Jeffries' Motion for Leave to Appear Pro Se and as Retained Lawyer for Colette M.A. Jeffries [DE 39] is hereby GRANTED; 2. Plaintiffs' service address shall be by United States mail to Mr. Laurance Jeffries, 7658 S. Crandon Avenue, Chicago, IL 60649; 3. The individual Defendants' reply in support of their pending Motion for Summary Judgment [DE 31] shall be due by May 18, 2009, five business days from the Court's acceptance of Plaintiff's Response [DE 40]; 4. The new deadlines set by this Court on April 1, 2009 [DE 38] shall remain in effect, and are repeated herein for ease of the parties: Motions in limine 2 May 28, 2009 Responses to motions in limine Joint Pretrial Stipulation and any Deposition Designations for use at trial for any unavailable witness Proposed Jury instructions and voir dire questions, objections to deposition designations and/or cross-designations: 12. June 11, 2009 June 12, 2009 Calendar Call The Calendar Call is set for 9:00am on June 18, 2009, in Courtroom 203E of the United States Courthouse, 299 East Broward Blvd, Fort Lauderdale, Florida; 13. The trial is set for the two-week period commencing June 22, 2009. DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers at the United States District Courthouse, Fort Lauderdale, Florida, this 11th day of May, 2009. Copies furnished: All counsel of record Mr. Laurance Jeffries, Esq. 7658 S. Crandon Avenue Chicago, IL 60649-4117 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?