Legal Opinion
Lattanzio v. Comta
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
Decided March 26, 2007No. Docket No. 05-4800-cvPublishedCited by 256 opinions
1Per curiam
Jim Lattanzio, pro se, and Galen Institute LLC (“Galen”), a limited liability company formed pursuant to the laws of Connecticut, seek to reinstate their appeals of a judgment of the District Court for the District of Connecticut dismissing their claims. Because Lattanzio’s own appeal is meritless, we deny with prejudice that branch of the motion seeking to reinstate it. Further, because Lattanzio is not an attorney, he cannot represent Galen, notwithstanding that he is Galen’s sole member. As a result of that defect in representation, we deny without prejudice that branch of the motion…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Rowland v. California Men's Colony, Unit II Men's Advisory CouncilSupreme Court of the United States · 1993
- Pavelic & LeFlore v. Marvel Entertainment Group, Div. of Cadence Industries Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1990
- Eagle Associates v. Bank of MontrealCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1991
- Covington v. City of New YorkCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1999
- Fed. Sec. L. Rep. P 96,038 Randolph Phillips v. John E. Tobin, Ralph K. Gottshall, and Alleghany CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1976
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by256 opinions
- United States Ex Rel. Mergent Services v. FlahertyCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2008
- Lattanzio v. ComtaCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2007
- United States v. HagermanCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2008
- ALL-STAR MARKETING GROUP, LLC v. Media Brands Co.District Court, S.D. New York · 2011
- RZS Holdings AVV v. PDVSA Petroleo S.A.Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 2007
251 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.