Ghirlanda v. Blessing et al
| Simone Ghirlanda |
| Latif Blessing and Major League Soccer, L.L.C. |
| 1:2022cv03800 |
| June 28, 2022 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of New York |
| Lois Bloom |
| Pamela K Chen |
| Labor: Labor/Mgt. Relations |
| 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Notice of Removal |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on August 8, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Civil Case Terminated. See #16 Stipulation of Dismissal. Ordered by Judge Pamela K. Chen on 8/8/2022. (Ben-Gigi, Yanai)
|
| Filing 16 STIPULATION of Dismissal by Latif Blessing (Riddell, Lara) |
|
ORDER: Having received the #15 Reply, the Court supplements its 7/26/2022 Order as follows: Third, Plaintiff declares that "Pan American Calcio is... [a] sole proprietorship...," Dkt. 15, at 3, and argues that he, therefore, may represent it before the Court. Id. at 1. "[N]umerous courts in this Circuit have held that a sole proprietorship may proceed pro se." Maersk Line A/S v. Carew, No. 19 Civ. 4870 (JPC), 2021 WL 431242, at *3 n.1 (S.D.N.Y. Feb. 8, 2021) (collecting cases); see also Kleinser v. SEC, 539 F. App'x 7, 8 n.1 (2d Cir. 2013) (allowing a sole proprietorship to proceed pro se). Thus, Plaintiff's #15 Reply adds force to, and further confirms, the Court's decision to deny the #13 Motion. Ordered by Judge Pamela K. Chen on 7/27/2022. (Ben-Gigi, Yanai)
|
| Filing 15 Letter to Judge Chen from Simone Ghirlanda, Pro Se in opposition to #13 letter motion to strike. (Lee, Tiffeny) |
|
ORDER: The Court is in receipt of the #13 request for a pre-motion conference. The Court elects to construe the request as a Motion to Strike, which the Court now denies. Defendant Blessing argues that Plaintiff Simone Ghirlanda "attempt[s] to litigate pro se claims that... belong to [a company] or were assigned to him [by the company,] [b]ut a company owner is not allowed to represent his company or litigate claims derived from his company on a pro se basis in federal court." (Dkt. 13, at 1.) To proceed pro se, "[a] person must be litigating an interest personal to him," Iannaccone v. Law, 142 F.3d 553, 558 (2d Cir. 1998), with the "threshold question [being] whether a given matter is plaintiff's own case or one that belongs to another." Id. (citations omitted). First, as a matter of fact, Plaintiff does not attempt to represent any company, but asserts claims personal to him under a contract. Plaintiff Ghirlanda argues that "Blessing and Ghirlanda executed a private exclusive agreement to authorize Ghirlanda to introduce, represent, and negotiate on Blessing's behalf[.]" (Dkt. 11, at 3 (emphasis added).) Second, as a matter of law, Defendant's misguided argument that Plaintiff has no right to enforce a contract which was allegedly signed on behalf of a company whose "precise corporate form" Defendant does not know, see Dkt. 13, at 3, disregards nearly two hundred years of case law stating that direct beneficiaries of contracts--like Plaintiff, who under the contract is the direct beneficiary of fees, see Dkt. 11, at 22--can enforce them personally in court. See, e.g., Restatement (Second) of Contracts 302; Lawrence v. Fox, 20 N.Y. 268 (1859); Flickinger v. Harold C. Brown & Co., 947 F.2d 595, 600 (2d Cir. 1991) (same). Because Defendant's frivolous argument does nothing to displace the fundamental "right of access to the courts, a strongly held notion stretching back to the beginnings of our Republic," Iannaccone, 142 F.3d at 557, the Court denies the Motion. Ordered by Judge Pamela K. Chen on 7/26/2022. (Ben-Gigi, Yanai)
|
|
ORDER granting #14 Motion for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice. The attorney shall register for ECF, registration is available online at www.pacer.gov. Once registered, the attorney shall file a notice of appearance and ensure that s/he receives electronic notification of activity in this case. Ordered by Magistrate Judge Lois Bloom on 7/21/2022. (Yindra, Hannah)
|
| Filing 14 MOTION to Appear Pro Hac Vice Filing fee $ 150, receipt number ANYEDC-15767371. by Latif Blessing. (Attachments: #1 Affidavit in Support of Pro Hac Vice Motion, #2 Certificate of Good Standing DC (Harrington), #3 Certificate of Good Standing CA (Harrington)) (Harrington, Eric) |
| Filing 13 Letter MOTION to Strike #11 MOTION to Remand Pre-Motion Letter Conference Request Concerning Defendant Latif Blessing's Motion to Strike Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(f) for Improper Pro Se Filing by Latif Blessing. (Riddell, Lara) |
|
ORDER: The Court is in receipt of the #7 and #9 Motions to Dismiss which Defendants Latif Blessing and Major League Soccer, L.L.C. (collectively, "Defendants") filed pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6). First, the Court STRIKES the Motions for Defendants' failure to comply with the Court's Individual Rules, that require the filing of a request for pre-motion conference before moving to dismiss. See Judge Chen's Individual Rules, Rule 1(3)(A) ("In all cases in which the moving party is represented by counsel... a pre-motion conference with the court must be requested before making any motion... pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12." (emphasis added)). Counsel for Defendants are advised to review the Court's Individual Practices and Rules before making additional filings. However, the Court deems Defendants' Motions to be requests for a joint pre-motion conference, to which Plaintiff shall respond by August 12, 2022. The Court will then determine whether a pre-motion conference is needed. Second, on July 8, 2022, Plaintiff Simone Ghirlanda filed a #11 Motion to Remand, which may obviate the need to decide Defendants' motions to dismiss. Thus, Defendants shall respond to Plaintiff's Motion to Remand by August 8, 2022, and Plaintiff shall file a reply by August 22, 2022. Ordered by Judge Pamela K. Chen on 7/12/2022. (Ben-Gigi, Yanai)
|
| Filing 12 NOTICE of Appearance by Lara Riddell on behalf of Latif Blessing (notification declined or already on case) (Riddell, Lara) |
| Filing 11 MOTION to Remand by Simone Ghirlanda. (Layne, Monique) |
|
ORDER granting #6 Motion for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice. The attorney shall register for ECF, registration is available online at www.pacer.gov. Once registered, the attorney shall file a notice of appearance and ensure that s/he receives electronic notification of activity in this case. Ordered by Magistrate Judge Lois Bloom on 7/8/2022. (Yindra, Hannah)
|
| Filing 10 Corporate Disclosure Statement by Major League Soccer, L.L.C. (Robbins, Howard) |
| Filing 9 MOTION to Dismiss by Major League Soccer, L.L.C.. (Attachments: #1 Memorandum in Support /MEMORANDUM OF LAW IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANT MAJOR LEAGUE SOCCER'S MOTION TO DISMISS) (Robbins, Howard) |
| Filing 8 NOTICE of Appearance by Howard Zachary Robbins on behalf of Major League Soccer, L.L.C. (aty to be noticed) (Robbins, Howard) |
| Filing 7 MOTION to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim by Latif Blessing. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order Proposed Order to Dismiss Plaintiff's Complaint) (Riddell, Lara) |
| Filing 6 MOTION to Appear Pro Hac Vice Filing fee $ 150, receipt number ANYEDC-15707881. by Latif Blessing. (Attachments: #1 Affidavit, #2 Riddell Certificate of Good Standing MD Bar) (Riddell, Lara) |
| Filing 5 This attorney case opening filing has been checked for quality control. See the attachment for corrections that were made, if any. (Bowens, Priscilla) |
| Filing 4 In accordance with Rule 73 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and Local Rule 73.1, the parties are notified that if all parties consent a United States magistrate judge of this court is available to conduct all proceedings in this civil action including a (jury or nonjury) trial and to order the entry of a final judgment. Attached to the Notice is a blank copy of the consent form that should be filled out, signed and filed electronically only if all parties wish to consent. The form may also be accessed at the following link: #http://www.uscourts.gov/uscourts/FormsAndFees/Forms/AO085.pdf. You may withhold your consent without adverse substantive consequences. Do NOT return or file the consent unless all parties have signed the consent. (Bowens, Priscilla) |
| Filing 3 NOTICE of Appearance by Tzvi N. Mackson on behalf of Latif Blessing (notification declined or already on case) (Mackson, Tzvi) |
| Filing 2 Civil Cover Sheet.. by Latif Blessing (Mackson, Tzvi) |
| Filing 1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL by Latif Blessing from Civil Court of the City of New York, Queens, Small Claims Part, case number SC-016144-20/QU. ( Filing fee $ 402 receipt number ANYEDC-15699969) (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A, #2 Exhibit B, #3 Exhibit C, #4 Exhibit D, #5 Exhibit E, #6 Exhibit F, #7 Exhibit G, #8 Exhibit H, #9 Exhibit I, #10 Exhibit J) (Mackson, Tzvi) |
| This case has been opened in the Eastern District of New York. If you plan to continue representing your client(s), you must be admitted to practice before this court. You must do so by applying for Pro Hac Vice or permanent admission. To apply for Pro Hac Vice admission, you must first register for an ECF login and password. Please visit the Court's website at www.nyed.uscourts.gov/attorney-admissions for guidance. Once registered, you must electronically file a Motion to Appear Pro Hac Vice. You must pay the required pro hac vice fee online. (Bowens, Priscilla) |
| Case Assigned to Judge Pamela K. Chen and Magistrate Judge Lois Bloom. Please download and review the Individual Practices of the assigned Judges, located on our #website. Attorneys are responsible for providing courtesy copies to judges where their Individual Practices require such. (Bowens, Priscilla) |
Access additional case information on PACER
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the New York Eastern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
