From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Citizens Against Longwall Mining v. Colt

United States District Court, C.D. Illinois, Springfield Division
Dec 14, 2005
No. 05-CV-3279 (C.D. Ill. Dec. 14, 2005)

Opinion

No. 05-CV-3279.

December 14, 2005


ORDER


Before the Court are two Motions for Admission of Counsel Pro Hac Vice [10] filed by Attorneys Williams C. Illingworth and John E. Rhine of the law firm Rhine, Ernest Vargo. From the Court's reading of the instant motions, it appears the attorneys are requesting authority to practice pro hac Vice for the purpose of representing COLT, LLC in filing its Motion to Dismiss [11], all in accordance with Local Rule 83.5(F), and that both attorneys are in process of applying for regular admission with this court.

WHEREFORE Motions for Admission of Counsel Pro Hac Vice [10] are ALLOWED and Attorneys Williams C. Illingworth and John E. Rhine are granted authority to practice in this cause pro hac vice for the purpose of filing the Motion to Dismiss [11] on behalf of Defendant COLT, LLC.

Thereafter, Attorneys Williams C. Illingworth and John E. Rhine must secure regular admission from the Central District of Illinois.


Summaries of

Citizens Against Longwall Mining v. Colt

United States District Court, C.D. Illinois, Springfield Division
Dec 14, 2005
No. 05-CV-3279 (C.D. Ill. Dec. 14, 2005)
Case details for

Citizens Against Longwall Mining v. Colt

Case Details

Full title:CITIZENS AGAINST LONGWALL MINING, Plaintiff, v. COLT, LLC and IEC, LLC.…

Court:United States District Court, C.D. Illinois, Springfield Division

Date published: Dec 14, 2005

Citations

No. 05-CV-3279 (C.D. Ill. Dec. 14, 2005)