Sadid v. Idaho State University et al, No. 4:2011cv00103 - Document 254 (D. Idaho 2014)
Court Description: MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER denying 253 Motion for Default Judgment. Plaintiff is ordered, by no later than 3/14/2014 at 1:30 p.m., to either (1) notify the Court that he wishes to represent himself in this action; or (2) have new counsel appear on his behalf. Plaintiff is also notified that on 3/14/2014, at 1:30 p.m., the Court intends to conduct an evidentiary hearing on defendants motion to enforce the settlement agreement in this matter. Plaintiff is ordered to appear at this hearing. Signed by Judge B. Lynn Winmill. (caused to be mailed to non Registered Participants at the addresses listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF) by (cjm)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF IDAHO HABIB SADID, an individual, Case No. 4:11-cv-00103-BLW Plaintiff, v. IDAHO STATE UNIVERSITY, ARTHUR VAILAS, RICHARD JACOBSEN, GRAHAM GARNER, DAVID BEARD, and JOHN/JANE DOES 1 through X, whose true identities are presently unknown, MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER Defendants. INTRODUCTION Pending before the Court is defendants Application for Entry of Default (Dkt. 253). Defendants ask the Court to dismiss plaintiff s action with prejudice. For the reasons expressed below, the Court will deny the application. DISCUSSION On February 6, 2014, this Court granted plaintiff s former counsel s motion to withdraw. See Dkt. 250. The order granting the motion stated that within 21 days of receiving the withdrawal order, plaintiff would need to appear in the action by either (1) appointing another attorney to represent him; or (2) appearing in person by filing written MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER - 1 notice with the Court to advise the Court in what manner he will be represented. Id. at 2; see D. Idaho Local R. 83.6(c)(1). Within that 21-day period, Dr. Sadid s counsel, Mr. Ronaldo Coulter, was obligated to continue representing Dr. Sadid until he had filed with the Court a proof of service of the withdrawal order. On February 7, 2014 the day after the withdrawal order was entered Dr. Sadid sent a letter directly to the Court. At that point, Mr. Coulter had not yet filed a proof of service with the Court, so the Court returned the letter to Dr. Sadid (with copies to all counsel), informing him that Mr. Coulter still represented him at that point. As it turns out, Mr. Coulter had served the withdrawal order on Dr. Sadid on February 7 (a Friday) the same day Dr. Sadid wrote his letter to the Court. Mr. Coulter filed the proof of service with the Court on February 10 (the following Monday). See Dkt. 252. The upshot is that Dr. Sadid likely received the order telling him to either find substitute counsel or appear on his own behalf a couple of days before the Court told him, in a separate communication, that Mr. Coulter still represented him. It seems likely that Dr. Sadid could have been confused by these conflicting communications. As a result, the Court will not dismiss this action at this point. Instead, the Court will grant plaintiff an additional period of time until March 14, 2014 in which to either notify the Court that he intends to represent himself or to find new counsel to appear on his behalf. ORDER IT IS ORDERED that: 1. Defendant s Application for Entry of Default Judgment (Dkt. 253) is DENIED MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER - 2 without prejudice. 2. Plaintiff is ordered, by no later than March 14, 2014 at 1:30 p.m., to either (1) notify the Court that he wishes to represent himself in this action; or (2) have new counsel appear on his behalf. 3. Plaintiff is also notified that on March 14, 2014, at 1:30 p.m., in the United States Courthouse in Pocatello, Idaho, the Court intends to conduct an evidentiary hearing on defendant s motion to enforce the settlement agreement in this matter. Plaintiff is ordered to appear at this hearing. 4. If plaintiff fails to appear in this action, either in person or through a newly appointed attorney, by March 14, 2014 at 1:30 p.m., such failure shall be sufficient grounds for the entry of a dismissal of this action with prejudice and without further notice. DATED: March 3, 2014 _________________________ B. Lynn Winmill Chief Judge United States District Court MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER - 3
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
