Sigaran v. Blaggards III Restaurant Corp.

Background

At a May 23, 2025 pre-motion conference, the court directed Ian E. Smith, counsel for Blaggards III Restaurant Corp. and William Lynch, to withdraw if the case was not resolved within one week. The court also directed Smith to tell the corporation that it must retain new counsel, and to tell Lynch that he could either retain new counsel or notify the court that he would represent himself. Smith was required to file proof that he had served the withdrawal letter.

Smith withdrew on June 18, 2025, and filed proof of service. On June 30, 2025, the plaintiff filed a status letter stating that the defendants had not obtained counsel.

Order

The court again directed Blaggards III Restaurant Corp. to obtain counsel by August 1, 2025. Because a corporation cannot appear without a lawyer, the corporation was not given the option of representing itself. The court again directed Lynch either to retain counsel or to inform the court that he would represent himself by August 1, 2025.

The court warned that if the defendants did not provide the required information or otherwise respond by August 1, there could be adverse consequences, including entry of default judgment. Default judgment is a judgment that may be entered when a party fails to defend the case. The court directed the plaintiff to serve the defendants with the order and file proof of service on the docket.

Disposition and Classification

This was a procedural order concerning the defendants’ representation and response deadlines. The court did not rule on the merits of the underlying dispute, and it did not enter default judgment in this order.