J. B. v. G6 Hospitality, LLC
- Haywood Gilliam
- 4:19-cv-07848
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 2
In J.B. v. G6 Hospitality, LLC, Judge Gilliam addressed two lawyers’ requests to withdraw and set steps for resolving representation issues.
The order affected the Gangaben A. Patel Trust, Kalpesh K. Balsara, their lawyers, and the handling of the plaintiff’s claims against Defendant Hotels and Kairos.
What happened
In J.B. v. G6 Hospitality, LLC, lawyers for the Gangaben A. Patel Trust, formerly doing business as Holiday Motel, and for Kalpesh K. Balsara, doing business as Sage Motel, asked to withdraw from representing their clients.
The court explained that an individual may represent only himself or herself, while corporations and other unincorporated associations must appear through a lawyer. The court directed the defendants to file properly completed substitutions of counsel if they did not oppose the withdrawals and planned to hire new lawyers. The excerpt does not include the full alternative instruction for a defendant that opposed withdrawal.
Judge Haywood S. Gilliam, Jr. did not state that either motion was granted or denied. Instead, the court said it would assess the representation issues at the January 18, 2022 case-management conference and ordered accordingly.
The detailed version
- J. B. v. G6 Hospitality, LLC · No. 4:19-cv-07848
- Haywood Gilliam
- Dec. 20, 2021
Background
Counsel for Defendant Gangaben A. Patel Trust, formerly doing business as Holiday Motel, filed a motion to withdraw. Counsel for Defendant Kalpesh K. Balsara, doing business as Sage Motel, filed a separate motion to withdraw.
Legal standard discussed
The court cited federal law providing that the right to represent oneself is personal to the individual litigant and does not allow that individual to act as a lawyer for other parties or entities. The court also stated that corporations and other unincorporated associations must appear through an attorney.
Court’s directions
The court instructed the Gangaben A. Patel Trust and Kalpesh K. Balsara that, if they did not oppose the motions and intended to substitute new counsel, they should make every effort to file properly executed substitution-of-counsel forms before January 18, 2022. That date was set for a case-management conference concerning the plaintiff’s claims against Defendant Hotels and Kairos. The opinion excerpt is incomplete and cuts off during the alternative instruction concerning what a defendant must do if it opposes its counsel’s withdrawal.
Disposition
The order does not say that either motion to withdraw was granted or denied. It states that the court would assess the status of the representation issues at the case-management conference. The order was signed by Judge Haywood S. Gilliam, Jr.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.