Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Apr. 10, 2023

Moncion v. Flat Rate Movers Ltd

Judge
Andrew Carter
Docket
1:21-cv-02865
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil ProcedureFee Petition
In one sentence

In Moncion v. Flat Rate Movers, Judge Carter allowed defense counsel to withdraw, granted a $9,819.25 charging lien, and stayed the case for 60 days.

Who this affects

Flat Rate Movers, Ltd. must retain a new attorney and have that attorney file an appearance by June 9, 2023. Christopher R. Travis and Travis Law PLLC may withdraw and have a $9,819.25 charging lien against the company.

What happened

In Moncion v. Flat Rate Movers, defense lawyer Christopher R. Travis and Travis Law PLLC asked to withdraw as counsel for Flat Rate Movers, Ltd. and requested a charging lien for unpaid fees.

The court granted both requests. It awarded Travis and his law firm a charging lien of $9,819.25 against Flat Rate Movers, Ltd., and stayed the case for 60 days so the company could retain a new lawyer.

Judge Andrew L. Carter, Jr. ordered the company’s new lawyer to file an appearance by June 9, 2023, and directed the withdrawing lawyer to notify the company. The clerk was directed to close the motion.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Moncion v. Flat Rate Movers Ltd · No. 1:21-cv-02865
Judge
Andrew Carter
Date
Apr. 10, 2023

What the Motion Asked For

Defense counsel Christopher R. Travis and Travis Law PLLC filed a motion to withdraw as counsel for Defendant Flat Rate Movers, Ltd. They also requested a charging lien, which is a legal claim by a lawyer or law firm against a client’s recovery or property to secure payment of fees.

The Court’s Rulings

The court found good cause and granted the application to withdraw. It also granted Travis and Travis Law PLLC a charging lien in the amount of $9,819.25 against Flat Rate Movers, Ltd.

The court stayed the case for 60 days to give Flat Rate Movers time to retain a new attorney. It stated that a corporate defendant may appear in court only through counsel and may not be represented without a lawyer by one of its principals. The company’s new attorney was required to file a notice of appearance by Friday, June 9, 2023.

The court asked Mr. Travis to notify Flat Rate Movers of his withdrawal and the requirement to obtain new counsel. It directed the clerk to terminate the open motion at ECF No. 49. The opinion addresses the withdrawal, charging lien, and temporary stay; it does not discuss the underlying claims.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.