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)

Download PDF
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?