Moallem v. Russo
Moallem v. Russo
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DOC #: SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK DATE FILED: 1/30/24 BRUCE MOALLEM, Plaintiff, -against- 23-CV-11297 (VEC) ORDER SEBASTIAN RUSSO, DISINTEGRATION RECORDS LLC, AND DOES 1–10; Defendants. WHEREAS on January 26, 2024, Defendant Sebastian Russo, proceeding pro se, filed an answer with both cross claims and a counterclaim, on behalf of himself, Disintegration Records, LLC, and Does 1-10; and WHEREAS individuals can represent themselves pro se but corporations and partnerships must be represented by an attorney. United States ex rel. Mergent Servs. v. Flaherty,
540 F.3d 89, 92(2d Cir. 2008). IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendant Sebastian Russo’s answer and cross and counterclaims are not effective as to Defendant Disintegration Records LLC and Defendants Does 1–10 and only are on behalf of himself. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff’s deadline to move for an order to show cause why default judgment should not be entered against Defendant Disintegration Records LLC and Does 1–10, in accordance with this Court’s Individual Practices, remains February 23, 2024.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Court will enter an order of referral to the Hon. Gabriel W. Gorenstein, United States Magistrate Judge, by separate order as to the dispute between Plaintiff Bruce Moallem and Defendant Sebastian Russo. 1 The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to strike the answer and cross-complaint at Dkt. 12, to the extent it purports to have been filed on behalf of Defendant Disintegration Records LLC and Does 1-10.
SO ORDERED. .
Date: January 30, 2024 VALERIE CARRONI New York, New York United States District Judge
Reference
- Status
- Unknown