From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Toro v. Doozy Cards, LLC

United States District Court, S.D. New York
Oct 4, 2022
22-CV-06783 (ALC) (S.D.N.Y. Oct. 4, 2022)

Opinion

22-CV-06783 (ALC)

10-04-2022

ANDREW TORO, Plaintiff, v. DOOZY CARDS, LLC, Defendants.


ORDER

ANDREW L. CARTER, JR., UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Defendant, a limited liability company, has failed to appear by counsel as is required. “[I]t is established that a corporation, which is an artificial entity that can only act through agents cannot proceed pro se.” See Jones v. Niagara Frontier Transp. Auth., 722 F.2d 20, 22 (2d Cir. 1983); see also Lattanzio v. COMTA, 481 F.3d 137, 140 (2d Cir. 2007) (“A limited liability company also may appear in federal court only through a licensed attorney.”) “Since a corporation's failure to retain counsel results in a failure to ‘otherwise defend,' it is appropriate to enter a default against a corporation which has failed to comply with a court order to retain counsel.” Dow Chem. Pac. Ltd. v. Rascator Maritime S.A, 782 F.2d 329, 336 (2d Cir. 1986).

Therefore, Defendant shall retain counsel and file a notice of appearance within 30 days of the date of this Order. Otherwise, the Court may enter default against Defendant. Defendant's time to answer or otherwise respond is stayed until the notice of appearance is filed.

The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to terminate the motion at ECF No. 7, which was improperly filed without counsel.

SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Toro v. Doozy Cards, LLC

United States District Court, S.D. New York
Oct 4, 2022
22-CV-06783 (ALC) (S.D.N.Y. Oct. 4, 2022)
Case details for

Toro v. Doozy Cards, LLC

Case Details

Full title:ANDREW TORO, Plaintiff, v. DOOZY CARDS, LLC, Defendants.

Court:United States District Court, S.D. New York

Date published: Oct 4, 2022

Citations

22-CV-06783 (ALC) (S.D.N.Y. Oct. 4, 2022)