Brandstein v. White Lamps
Decision Date | 10 August 1937 |
Citation | 20 F. Supp. 369 |
Parties | BRANDSTEIN et al. v. WHITE LAMPS, Inc., et al. |
Court | U.S. District Court — Southern District of New York |
Drechsler & Leff, of New York City, (David Drechsler and Herbert Ferster, both of New York City, of counsel), for complainants.
S. White, of New York City, per se.
In an action for the infringement of a patent the defendants joined in one answer, which was verified by Samuel White, individually, and as president of the defendant corporation, which is incorporated under the laws of New York state. The said Samuel White is not an attorney admitted to practice law in this court. The plaintiffs move to strike out the answer of White Lamps, Inc., upon the ground that a corporation cannot appear in person.
This is an interesting question which has recently aroused considerable comment. It is not, however, a new problem. At common law a corporation was considered incapable of appearing personally in any action. 1 Coke.Litt., 1st Amer.Edit., §§ 90, 66b; Chitty, vol. 1 (16th Amer.Ed.) 577.
Appearances generally in the federal courts are governed by 28 U.S.C.A. § 394. This section states:
"In all the courts of the United States the parties may plead and manage their own causes personally, or by the assistance of such counsel or attorneys at law as, by the rules of the said courts, respectively, are permitted to manage and conduct causes therein."
In the case of Mullin-Johnson Co. v. Penn. Mut. Life Ins. Co. (D.C.) 9 F.Supp. 175, it was said:
"Obviously plaintiff corporation could not plead and manage its case personally, as provided in 28 U.S.C.A. § 394, nor could it manage it through an agent of its appointment who is not an attorney of the court."
There is also a dictum to the same effect in Heiskell v. Mozie, 65 App.D.C. 255, 82 F.(2d) 861, where the court denied the right of a person to conduct the litigation in propria persona where he was the mere assignee of a claim for that specific purpose, and Judge Groner, in the course of his opinion, remarked, "No more can a corporation appear in proper person." 65 App.D.C. 255, 82 F.(2d) 861, at page 863
In Osborn et al. v. Bank of the United States, 9 Wheat. (22 U.S.) 738, at pages 829, 830, 6 L.Ed. 204, where the court had before it, among other matters, the question of whether the record of the case should disclose that the defendant bank authorized the institution or prosecution of the suit, Chief Justice Marshall, in the course of his opinion, stated:
To like effect is Commercial & Railroad Bank of Vicksburg v. Slocomb, 14 Pet. (39 U.S.) 60, 10 L.Ed. 354, where the question involved was whether or not a corporation in appearing in the court below by an attorney and pleading to the jurisdiction of the court, by the very fact of its appearance waived all objections to the jurisdiction of the court. In disposing of this question, the court stated at page 65, 14 Pet., 10 L.Ed. 354:
"But we are clearly of...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Move Organization v. US Dept. of Justice
...in propria persona") (italics in original); Simbraw, Inc. v. United States, 367 F.2d 373, 373-75 (3d Cir.1966); Brandstein v. White Lamps, 20 F.Supp. 369, 370 (S.D.N.Y.1937) ("while a corporation is a legal entity, it is also an artificial one, existing only in the contemplation of the law"......
-
Phillips v. Tobin
...1375, 198 Ct.Cl. 258 (1972); Shapiro, Bernstein & Co. v. Continental Record Co., 386 F.2d 426 (2d Cir. 1967); Brandstein v. White Lamps, Inc., 20 F.Supp. 369, 370-71 (S.D.N.Y.1937). To meet the requirement of an attorney's representation plaintiff claims that in fact he is "a person learned......
-
Oahu Plumbing and Sheet Metal, Ltd. v. Kona Const., Inc., 6823
...is that a corporation, being an artificial entity, can act only through its agents. In re Holliday's Tax Services, Inc.,supra, Brandstein v. White Lamps, Inc., 20 F.Supp. 369, 370 (S.D.N.Y.1937). Courts thus require that persons trained in the law and familiar with court procedure act as th......
-
Eagle Associates v. Bank of Montreal
...supra, 417 F.Supp. at 183 (citing 9 Fletcher on Corporations Sec. 4463 (1931, Cum.Supp.1975)); see also Brandstein v. White Lamps, Inc., 20 F.Supp. 369, 370 (S.D.N.Y.1937) ("While a corporation is a legal entity, it is also an artificial one, existing only in the contemplation of the law; i......
-
Unlicensed Mainland Attorneys' Participation in Local Arbitrations
...by a lawyer).7. See, e.g., K.M.A. Inc. v. General Motors Acceptance Corp., 652 F.2d 398, 399 (5th Cir. 1981); Brandstein v. White Lamps, 20 F. Supp. 369, 370 (S.D.N.Y 1937).8. See, e.g., K.M.A., Inc., 652 F.2d at 399; United States v. 9.19 Acres of Land, 416 F.2d 1244, 1245 (6th Cir. 1969).......