United States v. Brown

W.D. Louisiana

United States v. Brown

197 F. Supp. 2d 574, 2002 WL 654318

CourtDistrict Court, W.D. Louisiana

DecidedMarch 3, 2002

DocketCRIM. 01-10012

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 197 F. Supp. 2d 574 (United States v. Brown) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, W.D. Louisiana primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

United States v. Brown, 197 F. Supp. 2d 574, 2002 WL 654318 (W.D. La. 2002).

Pincite

Opinion

RULING

LITTLE, Chief Judge.

BLSB, INC. and W.W.T.O., INC. have filed pleadings in this matter. Each corporation suggests that the property seizures issued as a result of criminal convictions of the defendants in these proceedings should be annulled. Each corporation argues that as an owner of the seized property, it is not responsible for the criminal conduct of any defendant that used the property.

We are unable to consider the motions. In civil actions, and these motions are civil in nature, corporations must be represented by licensed counsel. Although an individual has a statutory right to represent himself in federal court without the participation of a lawyer, under 28 U.S.C. § 1654, a corporation may be represented only by an attorney. Thus, a corporation may not appear in a federal civil action pro se. This rule applies even where the would-be representative of the corporation is the corporate president and sole shareholder. See Lowery v. Hoffman, 188 F.R.D. 651 (M.D.Ala.1999). As the Fifth Circuit stated in Southwest Express Co., Inc. v. Interstate Commerce Comm’n, 670 F.2d 53, at 56: “Corporations and partnerships, by their very nature, are unable to represent themselves, and the consistent interpretation of Section 1654 is that the only proper representative of a corporation or partnership is a licensed attorney, not an unlicensed layman, regardless of how close his association with the corporation or partnership.”

The motions will not be considered by this court.

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

RULING

LITTLE, Chief Judge.

BLSB, INC. and W.W.T.O., INC. have filed pleadings in this matter. Each corporation suggests that the property seizures issued as a result of criminal convictions of the defendants in these proceedings should be annulled. Each corporation argues that as an owner of the seized property, it is not responsible for the criminal conduct of any defendant that used the property.

We are unable to consider the motions. In civil actions, and these motions are civil in nature, corporations must be represented by licensed counsel. Although an individual has a statutory right to represent himself in federal court without the participation of a lawyer, under 28 U.S.C. § 1654, a corporation may be represented only by an attorney. Thus, a corporation may not appear in a federal civil action pro se. This rule applies even where the would-be representative of the corporation is the corporate president and sole shareholder. See Lowery v. Hoffman, 188 F.R.D. 651 (M.D.Ala.1999). As the Fifth Circuit stated in Southwest Express Co., Inc. v. Interstate Commerce Comm’n, 670 F.2d 53, at 56: “Corporations and partnerships, by their very nature, are unable to represent themselves, and the consistent interpretation of Section 1654 is that the only proper representative of a corporation or partnership is a licensed attorney, not an unlicensed layman, regardless of how close his association with the corporation or partnership.”

The motions will not be considered by this court.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

197 F. Supp. 2d 574, 2002 WL 654318, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-brown-lawd-2002.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack