Rodriguez v. U.S., 2:15-cv-02507-JCM-PAL. (2016)
Court: District Court, D. Nevada
Number: infdco20160523a54
Visitors: 7
Filed: May 20, 2016
Latest Update: May 20, 2016
Summary: ORDER PEGGY A. LEEN , Magistrate Judge . The court conducted a hearing on March 12, 2016, on the Motion for Leave to File a Complaint in Intervention (Dkt. #10) filed by Sussex Insurance, fka Companion Property Insurance Company. The motion was unopposed and the court granted the motion to intervene directing Plaintiff in intervenor to separately file the proposed complaint in intervention which was attached as an exhibit to the motion. During the hearing, counsel for the United States and
Summary: ORDER PEGGY A. LEEN , Magistrate Judge . The court conducted a hearing on March 12, 2016, on the Motion for Leave to File a Complaint in Intervention (Dkt. #10) filed by Sussex Insurance, fka Companion Property Insurance Company. The motion was unopposed and the court granted the motion to intervene directing Plaintiff in intervenor to separately file the proposed complaint in intervention which was attached as an exhibit to the motion. During the hearing, counsel for the United States and c..
More
ORDER
PEGGY A. LEEN, Magistrate Judge.
The court conducted a hearing on March 12, 2016, on the Motion for Leave to File a Complaint in Intervention (Dkt. #10) filed by Sussex Insurance, fka Companion Property Insurance Company. The motion was unopposed and the court granted the motion to intervene directing Plaintiff in intervenor to separately file the proposed complaint in intervention which was attached as an exhibit to the motion. During the hearing, counsel for the United States and counsel for the Sussex advised the court that an attorney in Southern California purported to represent the Plaintiff Rodriguez in this case, but had not yet made an appearance or filed an application to proceed pro hac vice.
Mr. Rodriguez filed this action pro se. No attorney has made an appearance in this case or filed an application to appear pro hac vice. However, counsel for the other parties advised the court that Ralph M. Rios of Rios & Associates has contacted counsel indicating he has been retained to represent the Plaintiff in this matter. It appears that Mr. Rios is an attorney practicing in South Pasadena, California. He is not admitted in this court and has not applied to practice in this case. LR IA 11-2 governs the procedures for admission to practice in a particular case. The attorneys who have made an appearance in this case are placed in the difficult situation of determining whether to communicate directly with Mr. Rodriguez, who has appeared pro se, or t through the lawyer claiming to represent him, attorney Ralph M. Rios who has not been admitted or made an appearance.
Having reviewed and considered the matter,
IT IS ORDERED that:
1. Mr. Rodriguez has appeared pro se and is representing himself unless and until an attorney makes an appearance in this case in accordance with the Local Rules of Practice.
2. Neither Ralph M. Rios, nor any other attorney purporting to represent the Plaintiff, who has not made an appearance in this case in accordance with the Local Rules of Practice, shall not be recognized as counsel of record.
3. Counsel for the parties who have appeared and complied with the court's Local Rules of Practice need not communicate with Mr. Rodriguez through an attorney who has not made an appearance in this action, and may communicate directly with Mr. Rodriguez.
4. If he has been retained and intends to represent Mr. Rodriguez, Ralph M. Rios shall have until June 20, 2016, file an application to appear pro hac vice, and make an appearance in compliance with the Local Rules of Practice.
Source: Leagle
