Eddystone Rail Company, LLC v. Jamex Transfer Services, LLC
- Jesse Furman
- 1:17-cv-01266
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Eddystone Rail v. Jamex Transfer, Judge Furman set deadlines for responding to counsel’s withdrawal motion.
Jamex Transfer Services, LLC and its counsel of record, Mr. T. Ray Guy; any replacement counsel and any party wishing to oppose the withdrawal motion may also be affected.
What happened
In Eddystone Rail Co., LLC v. Jamex Transfer Services, LLC, Respondent’s counsel asked the court for permission to withdraw.
The court ordered counsel to serve Respondent with the motion, supporting documents, and the order, then file proof of service. It set deadlines for any opposition and reply.
Judge Furman said counsel remains responsible for Respondent unless the court grants the motion. He also warned that Jamex Transfer, a company, must appear through a lawyer and that a default judgment may be entered if new counsel does not appear after withdrawal.
The detailed version
- Eddystone Rail Company, LLC v. Jamex Transfer Services, LLC · No. 1:17-cv-01266
- Jesse Furman
- Jan. 25, 2023
Background
Mr. T. Ray Guy, counsel of record for Respondent Jamex Transfer Services, LLC, filed a motion to withdraw as counsel on January 24, 2023.
Court’s Order
The court ordered Mr. Guy to serve Respondent by January 27, 2023, with the motion, supporting documents, and a copy of the order. He also had to file proof of service on the docket by January 30, 2023.
The court set February 1, 2023, as the deadline for any opposition to the withdrawal motion and February 3, 2023, as the deadline for any reply. The order states that Mr. Guy remains Respondent’s counsel of record unless and until the court grants the motion. If Respondent has obtained new counsel, that lawyer must promptly file a notice of appearance.
The court warned that a company may appear in federal court only through counsel. It further warned that, if the court grants Mr. Guy’s motion and new counsel does not appear for Respondent soon afterward, the court may enter a default judgment against Respondent.
Disposition
The court did not grant or deny the motion to withdraw in this order. It ordered service and set briefing deadlines. Judge Jesse M. Furman also warned about the requirement that Respondent appear through counsel and the possible entry of default judgment.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.