Arbit LLC v. Schneider Electric SE

CourtDistrict Court, D. Arizona
DecidedMarch 17, 2023
Docket2:23-cv-00446
StatusUnknown

This text of Arbit LLC v. Schneider Electric SE (Arbit LLC v. Schneider Electric SE) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, D. Arizona primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Arbit LLC v. Schneider Electric SE, (D. Ariz. 2023).

Opinion

1 WO 2 3 4 5 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

9 Arbit LLC, No. CV-23-00446-PHX-DLR

10 Plaintiff, ORDER

11 v.

12 Schneider Electric SE,

13 Defendant. 14 15 16 On March 14, 2023, Stanislav Arbit filed a complaint on behalf of a limited liability 17 company called Arbit LLC, of which he is the sole member. (Doc. 1.) Mr. Arbit also filed 18 motions to proceed without prepaying fees and costs and to allow electronic filing. (Docs. 19 2, 3). 20 Corporations, partnerships, and other artificial entities can’t appear in federal courts 21 except through licensed counsel. Rowland v. Calif. Men’s Colony, 506 U.S. 194, 201-02 22 (1993); see also Multi-Denominational Ministry of Cannabis and Rastafari, Inc. v. Holder, 23 365 Fed. App’x 817, 819 (9th Cir. 2010) (“the law is clear that incorporated entities must 24 be represented by counsel in court”); Larsen v. Lauriel Inv. Inc., 161 F. Supp. 2d 1029, 25 1034 n.1 (D. Ariz. 2001) (noting that self-represented defendant “may not represent . . . a 26 corporate defendant”). Limited liability companies, like corporations, are artificial legal 27 entities. Joe Hand Promotions, Inc. v. Smith, No. 2:09-cv-01047-JWS, 2010 WL 2292315, 28 at *3 (D. Ariz. June 7, 2010) (“It is well established that limited liability companies are distinct legal entities, separate from their members.”’). As such, the rule requiring counsel 2|| for artificial entities applies equally to limited liability companies, even those with only a 3 || single member. Nothing in the record indicates that Mr. Arbit is a licensed attorney. He 4|| therefore can’t represent Arbit LLC in federal court and this lawsuit must be dismissed. 5 IT IS ORDERED that the motions Mr. Arbit has purported to file on behalf of Arbit 6|| LLC (Docs. 2 and 3) are STRICKEN and this case is DISMISSED WITHOUT 7\| PREJUDICE. If Artbit LLC wishes to file a lawsuit in federal court, it must do so through 8 || a licensed attorney. 9 Dated this 16th day of March, 2023. 10 11 12 {Z, 13 _- Ae 14 Used States Dictrid Judge 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

_2-

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Larsen v. Lauriel Investments, Inc.
161 F. Supp. 2d 1029 (D. Arizona, 2001)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Arbit LLC v. Schneider Electric SE, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/arbit-llc-v-schneider-electric-se-azd-2023.