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, )

Download PDF
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?