Hedick v. Spradling
- Cathy Seibel
- 7:21-cv-05459
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Hedick v. Spradling, Judge Seibel dismissed Tournesol’s claims without prejudice because Hedick could not represent the company without a lawyer.
Tournesol Des Champs, LLC’s claims were dismissed without prejudice unless it retained counsel within 30 days; the opinion does not state that Hedick’s individual claims were dismissed.
What happened
In Hedick v. Spradling, Tournesol Des Champs, LLC and Erik H. Hedick sued Theresea Spradling and others. They alleged violations of constitutional rights, the civil Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, and a federal criminal-conspiracy statute.
Hedick was representing himself without a lawyer. Judge Seibel explained that a nonlawyer may represent only himself, and that a company must be represented by its own lawyer. The ruling dismissed only Tournesol’s claims and did not state that Hedick’s individual claims were dismissed.
Judge Seibel dismissed Tournesol’s claims without prejudice to Tournesol retaining counsel within 30 days. Summonses would not issue at that time, and the court denied permission to appeal without paying fees because it certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith.
The detailed version
- Hedick v. Spradling · No. 7:21-cv-05459
- Cathy Seibel
- June 30, 2021
Background
Tournesol Des Champs, LLC and Erik H. Hedick brought claims against Theresea Spradling and other defendants under the First and Fourteenth Amendments, the civil provision of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, and 18 U.S.C. § 241, a federal criminal-conspiracy statute. The opinion states that the plaintiffs were proceeding without lawyers and had paid the filing fee.
Representation Issue
The court held that Hedick, as a nonlawyer representing himself, could represent only his own interests. A corporation cannot proceed without counsel, so Hedick could not represent Tournesol in this action. Tournesol therefore had to obtain its own lawyer.
Ruling
The court dismissed Tournesol’s claims without prejudice to Tournesol retaining counsel within 30 days of the order. The opinion does not dismiss Hedick’s individual claims. Summonses would not issue at that time, although the court could direct the Clerk to issue them in a separate order. The court also certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to appeal without paying filing fees. The opinion is a procedural order because it resolved the company’s ability to proceed through representation without reaching the underlying claims.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.