James D. Pauls, Ltd. v. Pauls
Decision Date | 17 April 1986 |
Docket Number | No. 85-1580-Civ.,85-1580-Civ. |
Citation | 633 F. Supp. 34 |
Parties | JAMES D. PAULS, LTD., et al., Plaintiff, v. James D. PAULS, Defendant. |
Court | U.S. District Court — Southern District of Florida |
J. Claybrook Lewis, pro se.
John Ostrow, Miami, Fla., for defendant.
ORDER OF DISMISSAL
THIS CAUSE is before the court on defendant's motion to dismiss. The basis of the motion is that J. Claybrook Lewis is improperly representing himself and three limited partnerships in a pro se action.* This court has reviewed the motion, memoranda, and the record in this action; therefore, it is
ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that said motion is granted, and this cause is dismissed without prejudice. Mr. Lewis shall be permitted to submit new pleadings on his own behalf, and the limited partnerships shall be permitted to maintain a subsequent action once counsel has been secured.
For the purposes of this motion the facts are simple. Mr. Lewis has been representing himself and three limited partnerships based on his status as a general partner. He is not a member of the bar. Defendant has challenged the propriety of Mr. Lewis' representation of the limited partnerships.
May a general partner, who is not a licensed attorney, represent a limited partnership in a pro se lawsuit?
In an analogous situation, the court stated:
Nicholson Supply Co. v. First Federal Savings & Loan Association, 184 So.2d 438, 440 (Fla.App.1966). Similarly, a limited partnership is not a natural person, but a creature of statute. Therefore, it must act through legal counsel in matters of law, since it is also an artificial entity. See also Fed.R.Civ.P. 11.
* Lewis signed the complaint naming all parties as plaintiffs and he has signed all motions and other documents as well.
To continue reading
Request your trial-
State ex rel. Stephan v. Williams
... ... 129 N.H. at 176-77, 523 A.2d 124. See also James D. Pauls, Ltd., v. Pauls, 633 F.Supp. 34 (S.D.Fla.1986), where the court ... ...
-
Artificial People: Why Corporations Cannot Appear in Court Without a Lawyer
...that the same rules apply to unincorporated associations. 129 N.H. at 176-77, 523 A.2d 124. See also James D. Pauls Ltd. v. Pauls, 633 F. Supp. 34 (S.D. Fla. 1986), where the court held that the general partner of three limited partnerships, who was not an attorney, could not represent the ......
-
Artificial People: Why Corporations Cannot Appear in Court Without a Lawyer
...that the same rules apply to unincorporated associations. 129 N.H. at 176-77, 523 A.2d 124. See also James D. Pauls Ltd. v. Pauls, 633 F.Supp. 34 (S.D. Fla. 1986), where the court held that the general partner of three limited partnerships, who was not an attorney, could not represent the p......