Banko v. Rotor X Aircraft Manufacturing Company

1 WO [5] 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA [8] 9 Matthew Banko, No. CV-23-02265-PHX-JAT 10 Plaintiff, ORDER 11 v. 12 Rotor X Aircraft Manufacturing Company, Donald Orval Shaw, Unknown Shaw, 13 Benjamin Donald Shaw, and Unknown Shaw, [14] 15 Defendants. 16 Pending before the Court is a motion filed by all defense counsel to withdraw from 17 representation for all Defendants. (Doc. 21). The motion seeks to leave all Defendants pro 18 se. 19 Local Rule 83.3 states that that an attorney seeking to withdraw must file an 20 application, “…setting forth the reasons therefor….” Here, the application offers no reason 21 why counsel seeks to withdraw. Thus, it will be denied without prejudice. 22 Additionally, one of the Defendants is a corporation. Corporations and other 23 unincorporated associations must appear in court through an attorney. Rowland v. 24 California Men's Colony, Unit II Men's Advisory Council, 506 U.S. 194 , 201–02 (1993) 25 (“It has been the law for the better part of two centuries, … that a corporation may appear 26 in the federal courts only through licensed counsel.... [T]he rationale for that rule applies 27 equally to all artificial entities.”); D. Beam Ltd. Partnership v. Roller Derby Skates, Inc., [28] 366 F.3d 972 , 973–74 (9th Cir. 2004) (“It is a long standing rule that ‘corporations and 1 || other unincorporated associations must appear in court through an attorney’”’). Thus, the || Court cannot allow counsel to withdraw and leave the entity Defendant pro se. 3 As a result, if counsel withdraws, the Court will strike the answer of the entity 4|| Defendant and permit Plaintiff to proceed by default against that Defendant. To ensure the client understands this reality, before counsel files another motion to withdraw, counsel || must confer with the client and advise them that the consent to withdraw on behalf of the || entity will most likely result in a judgment against the entity. Counsel must also give the 8 || entity a reasonable time to attempt to locate substitute counsel before withdrawing. 9 Based on the foregoing, 10 IT IS ORDERED that the motion to withdraw (Doc. 21) is denied without 11 prejudice. 12 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that all deadlines are confirmed. 13 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that counsel for Defendants must give a copy of this 14]| Order to each Defendant. 15 Dated this 6th day of September, 2024. [16] 17 A [18] 19 _ James A. Teil Org Senior United States District Judge [28] _2-