RP Golden State Management, LLC v. Ohio Security Insurance Company

District Court, E.D. California·Decided April 5, 2021·No. 1:19-cv-00600·Unknown

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10

11 RP GOLDEN STATE MANAGEMENT, ) Case No.: 1:19-cv-00600-DAD-JLT LLC, ) 12 Plaintiff, ) ORDER DISREGARDING MISCELLANEOUS ) MOTION 13 v. ) ) (Doc. 80) 14 OHIO SECURITY INSURANCE ) 15 COMPANY, ) Defendant. ) 16 )

17 On March 8, 2021, Mr. Desai, on behalf of the plaintiff, filed a miscellaneous motion. (Doc. 18 80.) However, the Court has previously advised Mr. Desai that Local Rule 183(a) provides that “[a] 19 corporation or other entity may appear only by an attorney.” RP Golden State Management, LLC is a 20 limited liability company, and they may not appear in this action unless they retain 21 appropriate counsel. See McGowan v. Boek, 402 F. App’x 287, 288 (9th Cir. 2010) (affirming 22 dismissal of case because corporate plaintiff was not represented by counsel) (collecting cases); In re 23 Highley, 459 F.2d 554, 555 (9th Cir. 1972) (“A corporation can appear in a court proceeding only 24 through an attorney at law.”) (collecting cases). Therefore, the motion is hereby DISREGARDED. 25 26 IT IS SO ORDERED.

27 Dated: April 3, 2021 _ /s/ Jennifer L. Thurston 28 CHIEF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

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

RP Golden State Management, LLC v. Ohio Security Insurance Company, (E.D. Cal. 2021).

RP Golden State Management, LLC v. Ohio Security Insurance Company (RP Golden State Management, LLC v. Ohio Security Insurance Company) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Christy McGowan v. Earl Boek
402 F. App'x 287 (Ninth Circuit, 2010)