From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

CP Productions, Inc. v. Does 1-300

United States District Court, N.D. Illinois, Eastern Division
Dec 29, 2010
No. 10 C 6255 (N.D. Ill. Dec. 29, 2010)

Opinion

No. 10 C 6255.

December 29, 2010


MEMORANDUM ORDER


In this action, currently scheduled for a status hearing on January 11, 2011, this Court has just learned of a "Motion To Quash Subpoena" that had been filed on December 16 by Sherry Park, a Charleston, Tennessee lawyer who lists herself as "Attorney For Doe 300." That motion, which came to this Court's attention only as a result of its practice of obtaining periodic printouts of pending motions in cases on its calendar, has violated than no fewer than three requirements imposed by this District Court's rules:

1. No Judge's copy was transmitted to this Court's chambers.
2. No notice of presentment accompanied the motion or was submitted shortly thereafter.
3. Attorney Park did not obtain, or seek leave to obtain, pro hac vice status.

As for the first of those violations, this Court's website contemplates the potential imposition of a fine on offending counsel (it is not this Court's responsibility to police electronic filings). Because attorney Park is an out-of-state lawyer (even though it is her responsibility to familiarize herself with local rules), no such fine will be imposed here — but this Court strikes the motion because of her multiple violations.

Dated: December 29, 2010


Summaries of

CP Productions, Inc. v. Does 1-300

United States District Court, N.D. Illinois, Eastern Division
Dec 29, 2010
No. 10 C 6255 (N.D. Ill. Dec. 29, 2010)
Case details for

CP Productions, Inc. v. Does 1-300

Case Details

Full title:CP PRODUCTIONS, INC. Plaintiff, v. DOES 1-300, Defendants

Court:United States District Court, N.D. Illinois, Eastern Division

Date published: Dec 29, 2010

Citations

No. 10 C 6255 (N.D. Ill. Dec. 29, 2010)