Yusenko et al v. Lennar Corporation et al
Filing
60
SUPERSEDING ORDER REGARDING WITHDRAWAL OF PLAINTIFF'S COUNSEL directing plaintiffs to notify the court of their desire to proceed with or without counsel within fifteen (15) days. Signed by Honorable Joseph F Anderson, Jr on 11/08/2011. (bshr, )
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA
ROCK HILL DIVISION
Oleg and Jennifer Yusenko,
)
)
Plaintiffs,
)
)
vs.
)
)
Lennar Carolinas, LLC; Home Buyers )
Warranty Corporation d/b/a 2-10 Home )
Buyers Warranty Corporation; National )
Home Insurance Company; John Doe, )
)
Defendants.
)
________________________________ )
C/A No.: 0:09-2395-JFA
SUPERSEDING
ORDER REGARDING
WITHDRAWAL OF
PLAINTIFF’S COUNSEL
This order supersedes the previous order (ECF No. 56) regarding the withdrawal of
plaintiff’s counsel.
On November 7, 2011, the court executed an order permitting D. Ryan McCabe, Brian
C. Gambrell, and Rogers Townsend & Thomas, PC, to withdraw as attorneys of record for
plaintiff s, Oleg and Jennifer Yusenko (hereafter “the client”). The court will allow the client
fifteen (15) days from the entry date of this order within which to mail the court notice of the
identity of replacement counsel or, alternatively, of the client’s desire to proceed with this
litigation without an attorney (“pro se”).1 To this end, the client shall, within fifteen days from
entry of this order, complete the attached Notice and mail it to the Clerk of Court at the
address indicated. If the client fails to mail the attached letter to the clerk within the time
prescribed, the court may strike the plaintiff’s complaint. This means that the plaintiff will not
be able to recover from the defendant. The postmark date will be determinative of the date
1
If any party to this litigation is a corporation, the court hereby gives notice that a corporation may not appear
through its corporate officers but may only appear in United States District Court through an attorney duly licensed to
practice in this district. E.g., Palazzo v. Gulf Oil Corp., 764 F.2d 1381, 1385 (11th Cir. 1985).
mailed.
If the client elects to proceed without counsel, the client is specifically advised that the
court will expect this litigation to be conducted in accordance with all provisions of the
Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Failure to comply could have serious consequences
including but not limited to the imposition of sanctions.
A party proceeding without counsel is obligated at all times to keep the court informed
of a current address and phone number. The party must also respond promptly to all
communications from the court and fully comply with all orders of the court. Failure to satisfy
these obligations may result in the serious consequences referenced above.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
November 8, 2011
Columbia, South Carolina
Joseph F. Anderson, Jr.
United States District Judge
Brian C Gambrell
D. Ryan McCabe, Jr.
Rogers Townsend and Thomas
PO Box 100200
Columbia, SC 29202-3200
803-771-7900
The Honorable Larry Propes
Clerk of Court
United States District Court
1845 Assembly Street
Columbia, South Carolina 29201-2455
In Re: 0:09-cv-02395-JFA Yusenko et al v. Lennar Corporation et al
Dear Mr. Propes:
In response to Judge Anderson's order, I wish to advise as follows:
_____
1. I have obtained a new attorney to represent me in this
matter. This attorney’s name, address, and telephone
number are as follows:
__________________________________________
__________________________________________
__________________________________________
OR
_____
2. I have NOT obtained a new attorney and will represent
myself in this matter. The clerk is directed to forward
all notices and pleadings to me at the above address. I
understand that I am obligated to comply with all
provisions of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and
to keep the Clerk of Court informed as to my proper
address.
Note: a corporation must retain counsel.
_____________________________________
Signature of Client
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?