Doe v. Baram
- Edgardo Ramos
- 1:20-cv-09522
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Doe v. Baram, Judge Ramos treated Baram’s letter as a dismissal motion and warned the company to hire counsel.
Jonathan Baram and Warren & Baram Management LLC, particularly the company’s ability to defend itself without counsel.
What happened
In Jane Doe v. Jonathan Baram and Warren & Baram Management LLC, Jonathan Baram asked the court to dismiss the federal claims because he believed the statute of limitations had expired.
Baram filed the request without a lawyer in a letter dated February 26, 2021, which was docketed on March 9, 2021. The court treated the letter as Baram’s motion to dismiss and directed the Clerk of Court to classify it that way.
Judge Edgardo Ramos said Baram could not file a motion for Warren & Baram Management LLC because a corporation must have a lawyer. The court gave the company 30 days to obtain counsel and warned that it could otherwise be held in default. The order did not decide whether the federal claims were barred by the statute of limitations.
The detailed version
- Doe v. Baram · No. 1:20-cv-09522
- Edgardo Ramos
- Mar. 11, 2021
Background
Jane Doe filed the lawsuit on November 12, 2020. On February 5, 2021, the court allowed the defendants to file a motion to dismiss by February 26, 2021. Jonathan Baram then submitted a letter, appearing without a lawyer, arguing that the lawsuit’s federal claims should be dismissed because the statute of limitations had expired.
Court’s Action
Although the letter was docketed on March 9, 2021, it was dated February 26, 2021. The court construed the letter as Jonathan Baram’s motion to dismiss and directed the Clerk of Court to classify it that way on the docket. The opinion does not state that the court decided the motion or ruled on the statute-of-limitations argument.
Warren & Baram Management LLC
Judge Edgardo Ramos advised Jonathan Baram that he could not file a motion on behalf of Warren & Baram Management LLC. The court explained that a corporation may not appear without a lawyer and must retain counsel to avoid default. The company was given 30 days for counsel to appear; otherwise, the court stated that it may be held in default.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.