J & J Sports Productions, Inc v. Glenda Stanley Corporation et al

Filing 15

DEFAULT JUDGMENT in favor of J&J Sports Productions against Glenda Stanley Corporation Signed by District Judge Lawrence P. Zatkoff. (MVer)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
SOUTHERN DIVISION
J&J SPORTS PRODUCTIONS, INC.,
Plaintiffs,
Case No. 12-14093
Hon. Lawrence P. Zatkoff

v.
GLENDA STANLEY and
GLENDA STANLEY CORPORATION,
Defendant.
/

OPINION AND ORDER
AT A SESSION of said Court, held in the
United States Courthouse, in the City of Port Huron,
State of Michigan, on the 31st day of May, 2013
PRESENT: THE HONORABLE LAWRENCE P. ZATKOFF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
On February 21, 2013, the Court conducted a scheduling conference for this case at 10:00
a.m., in the absence of both Defendants, neither of whom contacted the Court in any manner prior
to the scheduling conference. At the scheduling conference, the Court determined that: (a) neither
Defendant contributed to–or participated in–the preparation of the case summary that parties are
required to jointly prepare and submit to the Court in advance of the scheduling conference; and (b)
no attorney filed an appearance with the Court on behalf of the corporate Defendant (Glenda Stanley
Corporation). As the Court stated in an Order to Show Cause issued to Defendants on March 7,
2013:
It is well-established law that a corporate defendant cannot represent
itself; rather, a corporate defendant such as Glenda Stanley
Corporation must obtain and be represented by legal counsel.
In the March 7, 2013, Order to Show Cause, the Court:

1.

ORDERED each Defendant to SHOW CAUSE why the Court should
not enter judgment in favor of Plaintiff against that Defendant for her
or its failure to: (A) appear at the scheduling conference held on
February 21, 2013, as ordered by the Court; and (b) participate in the
preparation of the case summary, as ordered by the Court.

2.

ORDERED that, as to the corporate defendant (Glenda Stanley
Corporation) only, such Defendant must SHOW CAUSE, in writing,
that it has obtained legal counsel or, alternatively, why judgment
should not be entered against Glenda Stanley Corporation for failure
to retain legal counsel to represent the corporation in this judicial
proceeding.

3.

Advised each Defendant that her or its failure to comply with the
Order to Show Cause may result in: (A) entry of judgment in favor
of Plaintiff and against that Defendant, and (B) the issuance of
sanctions against that Defendant.

To date, the Court has received only a handwritten letter from the individual Defendant,
Glenda Stanley. Ms. Stanley stated that she was not aware of the scheduling conference or her
obligation to participate in the preparation of the case summary. Further, as Ms. Stanley had stated
in her “answer” to Plaintiff’s complaint, Ms. Stanley responded that: (1) she paid her cable provider
(Comcast) for the televised boxing match by charging the cost on the credit card of her friend, (2)
she had no knowledge of Plaintiff’s existence or rights to the telecast, and (3) due to some technical
difficulties, the telecast was never shown at her bar. Ms. Stanley instead contended that the
allegations of Plaintiff should be brought against her cable provider (Comcast) because she paid
Comcast for the fight and asks the Court to end this case. Finally, Ms. Stanley stated that “the
business [presumably the Glenda Stanley Corporation] is not open now and should not be held
accountable for something it was not responsible for.” No response or notification of legal
representation has been received on behalf of the corporate Defendant, Glenda Stanley Corporation.
Based on the foregoing, the Court concludes that judgment should not be entered against the

2

individual, Defendant Glenda Stanley and dismisses the Order to Show Cause as it relates to
Defendant Glenda Stanley. Therefore, Plaintiff’s cause of action against Ms. Stanley shall continue.
As to the corporate Defendant, Glenda Stanley Corporation, such Defendant cannot proceed
in this action absent legal representation, as the Court made clear to Defendants in the Order to
Show Cause. Despite the Court’s clear statement that Glenda Stanley Corporation could only
proceed in this matter if it was represented by legal counsel, Glenda Stanley Corporation still has
not obtained legal counsel. Accordingly, as: (1) Glenda Stanley Corporation cannot proceed without
legal representation, (2) the Court advised Glenda Stanley Corporation that judgment could be
entered against the Glenda Stanley Corporation if it did not obtain legal representation, and (3)
Glenda Stanley Corporation still has not obtained legal representation, the Court hereby ORDERS
that Judgment shall be, and hereby is, entered in favor of Plaintiff as to Defendant Glenda Stanley
Corporation.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
S/Lawrence P. Zatkoff
LAWRENCE P. ZATKOFF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Dated: May 31, 2013

3