SOUTH EAST ENTERPRISE GROUP LLC et al v. GILL et al
Filing
49
ORDER denying 33 Motion to Intervene. Ordered by U.S. District Judge CLAY D LAND on 04/21/2015. (CGC)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
COLUMBUS DIVISION
SOUTH EAST ENTERPRISE GROUP
LLC, et al.,
*
*
Plaintiffs,
*
vs.
CASE NO. 4:15-cv-25 (CDL)
*
JOHN GILL, et al.,
*
Defendants.
*
O R D E R
Michael Gill, who is already a Defendant in this action,
filed a motion to “intervene” in this action in his capacity as
an authorized representative of Multi Marts Corp. and Order of
the
IAL,
action.
Inc.,
But
both
Gill
of
does
whom
not
are
already
seek
to
Plaintiffs
assert
in
claims
this
in
a
representative capacity; he seeks to have Multi Marts and Order
of the IAL assert claims on their own behalf.
He argues that he
is the only person authorized to make decisions on their behalf
and
that
those
persons
directing
litigation have no such authority.
their
actions
in
this
The problem with Gill’s
present motion is that it in substance seeks to have an existing
party
“intervene”
in
the
present
action.
Gill
provided
no
authority for this curious interpretation of Rule 24 of the
Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
And the Court can find no
basis
for
such
a
contrived
interpretation
of
the
rule.
Accordingly, the motion to intervene (ECF No. 33) is denied.
This ruling does not prevent Michael Gill from asserting
any claims or defenses that he wishes to assert on his own
behalf in this action.
It also does not mean that no remedy
exists for someone in Gill’s position to force a corporation to
assert
claims
representatives
procedural
that
refuse
device
to
its
to
current
alleged
assert.
But
accomplish
that
Rule
officers
24
objective
is
not
when
and
the
the
corporation is already a party to the action.
IT IS SO ORDERED, this 21st day of April, 2015.
S/Clay D. Land
CLAY D. LAND
CHIEF U.S. DISTRICT COURT JUDGE
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
2
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?