Kipp v. Royal & Sun Alliance Personal Insurance Company
Cases that cite this one
15 later published cases cite this decision.
- Fifth Third Bank v. Greene (District Court, N.D. Indiana 2024)
- Make It Happen Affordable Homes LLC (United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Michigan 2025)
- Shaik v. Williams (United States District Court, Oklahoma Eastern 2024)
- Shaik v. Mordy (United States District Court, Oklahoma Eastern 2024)
- Young v. Lake County Treasurer (District Court, N.D. Indiana 2023)
- Hopson, Benjamin v. Google, LLC (District Court, W.D. Wisconsin 2023)
- Wright Way Capital v. Carver (District Court, E.D. Wisconsin 2022)
- Wright Way Capital v. Vlasseman (District Court, E.D. Wisconsin 2022)
- Wright Way Capital v. Carver (District Court, E.D. Wisconsin 2022)
- Wright Way Capital v. Vlasseman (District Court, E.D. Wisconsin 2022)
- Owens, Rita v. Quality Inn (District Court, W.D. Wisconsin 2022)
- David R. Nicholson, Builder, LLC v. Jablonski (Pa. Super. Ct. 2017)
- Lattanzio v. Comta (2d Cir. 2007)
- Lattanzio v. Comta (2d Cir. 2007)
- Gilley v. Shoffner (District Court, M.D. North Carolina 2004)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion
ORDER
Transmotion, LLC (“Transmotion”), one of the many defendants in this product liability action, is a limited liability company (“LLC”) organized under the laws of the State of Wisconsin. In response to the plaintiffs Amended Complaint, Transmotion has filed an “Intended Answer” 1 signed by Tim Sullivan, “Representative for Defendant.” It does-not appear that Mr. Sullivan is a licensed attorney.
It is well-established that “a corporation may appear in the federal courts only through licensed counsel.” Operating Engineers Local 139 Health Fund v. Raw-son Plumbing, Inc., 130 F.Supp.2d 1022, 1023 (E.D.Wis. 2001) (citing Rowland v. Cal. Men’s Colony, Unit II Men’s Advisory Council, 506 U.S. 194, 201-02, 113 S.Ct. 716, 121 L.Ed.2d 656 (1993)); see also Donovan v. Road Rangers Country Junction, Inc., 736 F.2d 1004, 1005 (5th Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 1217, 105 S.Ct. 1198, 84 L.Ed.2d 342 (1985). Similarly, a *963 partnership may. only appear in court through counsel. Eagle Assocs. v. Bank of Montreal, 926 F.2d 1305, 1309-10 (2d Cir. 1991). In Wisconsin, as in other jurisdictions, an LLC is “a hybrid form of business organization that combines the corporate characteristics of limited liability for its owners with the ... taxation and operating flexibility of a partnership.” Joseph W. Boucher and Leonard S. Sosnowski, The Wisconsin Limited Liability Company, 66 WISCONSIN LAWYER 9 (December 1993). Accordingly, an LLC should be governed (on this issue, at least) by the same rule that applies to both corporations and partnerships. In other words, “whether the LLC [is] characterized as a corporation, a partnership, or a hybrid, it may only appear in court through counsel.” Collier v. Cobalt, LLC, 2002 WL 726640 (E.D.La.); see also In re ICLNDS Notes Acquisition, LLC, 259 B.R. 289, 293-94 (Bankr.N.D.Ohio 2001).
The appropriate response when an LLC’s pleading is not signed by counsel is to: (1) order the LLC to appear by counsel “within a reasonable time,” and (2) issue a warning that the failure to do so may result in entry of default and default judgment. Operating Engineers, 130 F.Supp.2d at 1024-25.
NOW THEREFORE, BASED ON THE FOREGOING, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT:
1. Transmotion shall file an answer signed by counsel within twenty (20) days of the date below; and
2. Failure to comply with this order shall result in entry of default and entry of default judgment.
SO ORDERED.
. The "Intended Answer” only responds to selected paragraphs of the Amended Corn-plaint.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.