Tokareva v. Security Service Provider Corp.
- Edgardo Ramos
- 1:20-cv-09867
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Tokareva v. Security Service Provider Corp., Judge Ramos denied the corporation’s request to proceed without counsel and warned default judgment could follow.
Security Service Provider Corp., whose request to proceed without counsel was denied and which was warned that failing to obtain counsel may result in default judgment.
What happened
Asya Tokareva sued Security Service Provider Corp. in the Southern District of New York. The company, through its alleged owner, asked to participate without a lawyer.
The court explained that a person who is not a lawyer cannot represent a separate corporation. It therefore denied the company’s request to appear without counsel.
Judge Ramos warned that failing to have a lawyer appear for the corporation may result in default judgment against it.
The detailed version
- Tokareva v. Security Service Provider Corp. · No. 1:20-cv-09867
- Edgardo Ramos
- Dec. 7, 2020
Background
On December 2, 2020, Security Service Provider Corp., through its alleged owner, filed a letter asking to proceed without a lawyer in the lawsuit brought by Asya Tokareva.
Ruling
The court relied on Second Circuit and Southern District of New York authority holding that a nonlawyer may not represent a separate legal entity such as a corporation. Because a corporation must appear through counsel, the court denied Security Service Provider Corp.’s request to proceed without counsel.
The court warned that failure to have counsel appear for the corporation may result in entry of a default judgment against the defendant. The order did not state that default judgment had been entered.
Disposition
The request to appear without counsel was denied. Judge Edgardo Ramos issued the order on December 7, 2020.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.