Bullock v. Lauri Janae Flennigan Miller Succession
Filing
6
MEMORANDUM ORDER re 5 Memorandum Order: The 12/15/2014 deadline has passed, and the succession has not enrolled counsel or submitted anything further to the court. Accordingly, the successions 4 Answer to Complaint is stricken, and the cler k of court is directed enter a default against the succession. Plaintiff, Mr. Bullock, is now directed to file by January 23, 2015 a Motion for Default Judgment in accordance with the applicable rules. (Compliance Deadline set for 1/23/2015.) If Bullock does not take the steps required by this order, his complaint may be dismissed for failure to prosecute. Signed by Magistrate Judge Mark L Hornsby on 12/17/2014. (crt,Dauterive, C)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA
SHREVEPORT DIVISION
JIMMY E. BULLOCK
CIVIL ACTION NO. 14-cv-2802
VERSUS
JUDGE HICKS
LAURI JANAE FLENNIGAN
MILLER SUCCESSION
MAGISTRATE JUDGE HORNSBY
MEMORANDUM ORDER
Jimmy Bullock filed this civil action against the Succession of Lauri Janae Flennigan
Miller. He alleges that Ms. Miller, before she died, drove her vehicle in a negligent manner
and caused an accident that seriously injured Mr. Bullock. The complaint alleges that Miller
did not have any liability insurance coverage for the accident.
An answer has been filed on behalf of the succession by Jeff L. Flenniken, who states
that he was appointed provisional administrator of the succession. He represents that the
estate has no assets whatsoever and no funds to employ an attorney. He agrees with Mr.
Bullock that there is no known liability insurance to cover the accident.
Corporations, partnerships, successions, or other fictional legal persons cannot appear
for themselves or through persons who are not licensed as attorneys.
They must be
represented in federal court by an attorney who is admitted to the court. 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).
The court entered an earlier oder (Doc. 5) and noted there is no indication that the
answer filed by the succession was signed by a person who is an attorney admitted to the bar
of this court. The Fifth Circuit has affirmed a district court that struck defenses 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.
In accordance with Memon, the order notified the succession that its answer could
be stricken and a default entered against it without further notice if the succession did not
make an appearance through a licensed attorney by December 15, 2014. That deadline has
passed, and the succession has not enrolled counsel or submitted anything further to the
court. Accordingly, the succession’s answer (Doc. 4) is stricken, and the clerk of court is
directed enter a default against the succession.
Plaintiff, Mr. Bullock, is now directed to file by January 23, 2015 a Motion for
Default Judgment that is fully supported by affidavits, documentation or other evidence
sufficient to prove the validity of service of process, the liability of defendant, and the extent
of damages suffered. The motion shall be supported by a memorandum that explains the
Page 2 of 3
legal basis for liability and damages, and that states whether an evidentiary hearing is
necessary to assess the amount of damages. The motion must be accompanied by a proposed
judgment. If Bullock does not take the steps required by this order, his complaint may be
dismissed for failure to prosecute.
THUS DONE AND SIGNED in Shreveport, Louisiana, this 17th day of December,
2014.
Page 3 of 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?