Clifford v. Bryans Construction et al

Filing 77

MEMORANDUM ORDER: Bryan Construction Inc, represented by counsel, filed an answer. Doc. 49. To comply with the notice requirement, Bryan is advised that it must enroll counsel to represent it in this case no later than 9/19/2011. If Bryan does not do so, the court will strike its answer and order the Clerk of Court to enter a default. Signed by Magistrate Judge Mark L Hornsby on 9/6/2011. (crt,Keifer, K)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA
SHREVEPORT DIVISION

JAMES CLIFFORD

CIVIL ACTION NO. 10-cv-1352

VERSUS

JUDGE STAGG

BRYAN CONSTRUCTION , ET AL

MAGISTRATE JUDGE HORNSBY

MEMORANDUM ORDER
The last defendant in this case is Bryan Construction, Inc. Bryan, represented by
counsel, filed an answer. Doc. 49. The attorneys for Bryan later filed a Motion to Withdraw
as Counsel (Doc. 67) and attached a letter from the company president, in which the
president stated that Bryan was no longer financially in a position to defend itself in the
litigation and consented to the withdrawal of its attorneys. The court granted the requested
withdrawal, so Bryan is no longer represented by counsel.
“In all courts of the United States the parties may plead and conduct their own cases
personally or by counsel as, by the rules of such courts, respectively, are permitted to manage
and conduct causes therein.” 28 U.S.C. § 1654. Almost all courts have held that this statute
“does not allow corporations, partnerships, or associations to appear in federal court
otherwise than through a licensed attorney.” Rowland v. California Men's Colony, 113 S.Ct.
716, 721 (1993). The Fifth Circuit has long followed the rule that corporations, partnerships
or other “fictional legal persons” cannot appear for themselves personally but must be
represented by licensed counsel. Southwest Express Co. v. Interstate Commerce
Commission, 670 F.2d 53, 55 (5th Cir. 1982). See also Memon v. Allied Domecq Qsr, 385

F.3d 871, 873 (5th Cir. 2004); U.S. v. Trowbridge, 251 F.3d 157 (5th Cir. 2001); and KMA,
Inc. v. General Motors Acceptance Corp., 652 F.2d 398, 399 (5th Cir. 1981).
Bryan is no longer represented by counsel and cannot participate in the litigation
without counsel. The Fifth Circuit has affirmed a district court that struck an answer offered
by an entity that purported to appear through a non-lawyer. Donovan v. Road Rangers
Country Junction, Inc., 736 F.2d 1004, 1005 (5th Cir. 1984). But the Court suggested in
Memon that a district court should expressly warn or formally order the entity to retain
counsel before the court takes the harsh measures of striking pleadings or dismissing claims
with prejudice. Memon, 385 F.3d at 874.
To comply with the notice requirement, Bryan is advised that it must enroll counsel
to represent it in this case no later than September 19, 2011. If Bryan does not do so, the
court will strike its answer and order the Clerk of Court to enter a default.
THUS DONE AND SIGNED in Shreveport, Louisiana, this 6th day of September,
2011.

Page 2 of 2