Ubri v. Majestic Associates LLC
- Vernon Broderick
- 1:23-cv-07954
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Ubri v. Majestic Associates LLC, Judge Broderick required defense counsel to correct or justify email service of its withdrawal motion.
Counsel for Joshua Balsam, Majestic Property Management Associates, LLC, and 3871 Village Court Associates, LLC, and those defendants’ pending request for counsel to withdraw.
What happened
In Ubri v. Majestic Associates LLC, counsel for Joshua Balsam, Majestic Property Management Associates, LLC, and 3871 Village Court Associates, LLC asked to withdraw from representing those defendants.
The court found that counsel’s papers showed service by email but directed counsel to serve the papers under the required federal rule or explain why email service should be allowed. The court did not decide the withdrawal request in this order.
Judge Broderick ordered counsel to file a new service affidavit or an explanatory letter by June 20, 2025.
The detailed version
- Ubri v. Majestic Associates LLC · No. 1:23-cv-07954
- Vernon Broderick
- June 10, 2025
Background
Counsel for Defendants Joshua Balsam, Majestic Property Management Associates, LLC, and 3871 Village Court Associates, LLC moved to withdraw as counsel. The motion papers included an affidavit stating that they had been served by electronic mail.
Court’s action
The court directed defense counsel to complete service of the motion papers under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4 or explain why the court should permit service by email. The court instructed counsel to file either a new affidavit of service or a letter explaining the need for email service by June 20, 2025.
The order did not grant or deny the motion to withdraw. It addressed only the adequacy of service and required counsel to provide additional filing or service information.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.