Frix v. Integrity Med. Sys. - No. 1:16-cv-02559-STA-egb, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 106514 (W.D. Tenn. July 11, 2017)

Rule:

Failure by a corporation to retain counsel may result in an entry of default against it. See Grainger v. Solomon, No. 3:07-CV-91, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 72337, 2008 WL 3823734, at *2 (E.D. Tenn. Aug. 12, 2008).

Facts:

On May 12, 2017, the Court held a hearing regarding the motion by defense counsel to withdraw from this case. At the hearing, Defendant's registered agent, David Denholtz, appeared, informed the Court that he intended to secure new counsel for Defendant, and requested at least thirty days' time to do so. At the conclusion of the hearing, the Court orally granted counsel's motion to withdraw. On June 7, 2017, the Court granted Defendant's motion for a time extension, giving Defendant thirty days in which to secure new counsel. That time period has now elapsed and no notice of appearance has been filed by new counsel retained by Defendant, as the order required. 

Issue:

May a failure by a corporation to retain counsel result in an entry of default against it?

Answer:

Yes

Conclusion:

A corporation may not appear in the district court pro se. In this case, Defendant "must be represented in court by an attorney and may not be represented by an officer." Failure by a corporation to retain counsel may result in an entry of default against it.  Accordingly, Defendant is hereby directed to show cause, within eleven (11) days of the entry of this order, why the clerk should not enter default against it, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 55(a).