Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Snarf Zagyg" data-source="post: 8586560" data-attributes="member: 7023840">Okay, very brief instructions on why this isn't that surprising.In order for an attorney to litigate in a forum (I'm using general terms here), they have to be admitted to practice in that forum. Usually, you think of this as the "state." So, for example, if you want to be an attorney in California, you take the California Bar, and you can practice in any state court in California.But we also have federal courts, which have additional (usually minor) requirements to practice. So for an attorney to practice in front of a particular federal court (here, the Western District of Washington), they have to be admitted to practice in front of that court. LaNasa's Wilmington-based attorney, Russell D. Nugent, dismissed the original claim in North Carolina. In order to file a complaint in the WD Wash., LaNasa had to obtain counsel that was licensed to practice there (Dayna Christian of the Immix Law Group). The Complaint that was filed, however, was nearly identical to the one originally filed by Nugent.Which likely meant that Dayna Christian is only "local counsel" and that the actual filings, etc., are being done by Nugent. Nugent's request to appear pro hac vice just means that he is asking the Court to allow him to act as an attorney before the Court for the purposes of this case. None of this is very surprising, other than the observation that Nugent has apparently always been acting as the real attorney in interest.</blockquote>

Verification