Task Force BPO, LLC v. AVA Consulting et al

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE
AT KNOXVILLE
TASK FORCE BPO, LLC, 	)
)
Plaintiff, 	)
)
v. 	) 	No. 3:24-CV-53-TAV-JEM
)
AVA CONSULTING, LLC, and 	)
REMKO BLOEMHARD, 	)
)
Defendants. 	)
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This case is before the undersigned pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636, the Rules of this Court,
and Standing Order 13-02.
Now before the Court is the Motion of David P. Pierce, Esq. and Coolidge Wall Co., LPA
to Withdraw as Counsel of Record for Defendants Ava Consulting, LLC and Remko Bloemhard
[Doc. 27], filed by Defendants’ attorney, David D. Pierce with the law firm of Coolidge Wall Co.,
LPA (“Coolidge Wall”). Attorney Pierce seeks to withdraw from representing Defendants because
“[they] have refused to cooperate in the defense or pay Coolidge Wall for legal services rendered
in connection with this action” [Id. at 1]. He asserts that “Defendants have failed to communicate
with counsel or participate in a meaningful way in their defense” [Id. at 2]. He further submits that
Defendants “have failed to pay their lawyers for services rendered in this matter despite multiple
demands for the same” [Id.]. Attorney Pierce represents that he served a copy of his motion on
Defendants on November 4, 2025 [Id. at 3; see also Doc. 27-1]. The motion includes Defendants’
address and telephone number [Doc. 27 p. 3].
Case 3:24-cv-00053-TAV-JEM Document 28 Filed 11/24/25 Page 1 of 4 PageID
#: <pageID>

2
Pursuant to Local Rule 83.4, in order to withdraw from a case, an attorney must do the
following:
(1) File a motion with the Court requesting permission to withdraw
as counsel of record;
(2) Include in the motion the current mailing address and telephone
number of the client;
(3) Unless the motion is signed by both the attorney and the client
or a consent to the withdrawal signed by the client is attached to the
motion, provide a copy of the motion to the client at least 14 days
prior to the date the motion is filed;
(4) If a hearing date on the motion is set, certify in writing to the
Court that the client was served at least 7 days before the hearing
with notice (i) of the date, time, and place of hearing and (ii) that the
client as a right to appear and be heard on the motion; and
(5) Certify to the Court that the above requirements have been met.
E.D. Tenn. L.R. 83.4(g). Attorney Pierce has met these requirements.
The Local Rules also provide, “If the client is a corporation or other artificial person or
legal entity created by statute that may only appear in court through counsel, the Court, absent
extraordinary circumstances, shall not allow the attorney to withdraw until the client has obtained
substitute counsel.” Id. Here, the Court finds extraordinary circumstances permit Attorney Pierce’s
withdrawal. He explains that he has made multiple attempts to demand payment from Defendants
to no avail. He further states that Defendants have failed to communicate with counsel or
participate in a meaningful way in their defense.
The Court therefore GRANTS the motion [Doc. 27]. The Court expects Attorney Pierce
to provide copies of any relevant documents to any future counsel for Defendants or directly to
Defendants upon request. Otherwise, Attorney Pierce and Coolidge Wall are RELIEVED of their
duties in this case.
Case 3:24-cv-00053-TAV-JEM Document 28 Filed 11/24/25 Page 2 of 4 PageID
#: <pageID>

3
The 	Court 	ADMONISHES 	Defendant 	Ava 	Consulting, 	LLC 	(“Defendant 	Ava
Consulting”) that corporations cannot appear in federal court except through a licensed attorney.
See In re Classicstar Mare Lease Litigation, No. 5:07-cv-353, 2009 WL 1468594, at *1 (E.D. Ky.
May 13, 2009) (“It is well settled that corporations, partnerships, and associations cannot appear
in federal court except through a licensed attorney.” (citations omitted)). The Court therefore
ORDERS Defendant Ava Consulting to retain counsel on or before December 12, 2025. See
Doherty v. Am. Motors Corp., 728 F.2d 334, 340 (6th Cir. 1984) (“The rule of this circuit is that
a corporation cannot appear in federal court except through an attorney.”). The potential
consequence of not securing replacement counsel for Defendant Ava Consulting is that the Court
could enter default and a default judgment against the corporation. See Peterson v. Sunderman,
No. 10-114, 2010 WL 11520493, at *1 (E.D. Ky. Oct. 6, 2010) (“When a corporation is
unrepresented by counsel, an opposing party may seek the entry of default under Rule 55(a),
ultimately followed by the entry of default judgment under Rule 55(b)”); GCIU-Employer Ret.
Fund v. Amerigraph, LLC, No. 2:06-CV-1072, 2008 WL 762082, at *1 (S.D. Ohio Mar. 20, 2008)
(granting the plaintiff’s motion for default judgment against a corporate defendant after the
defendant’s counsel withdrew and the defendant failed to obtain substitute counsel).
With respect to Defendant Bloemhard, the Court ADMONISHES him that he is
DEEMED to be proceeding pro se. Until he obtains substitute counsel, it is his obligation to stay
up to date on the status of this case and comply with the deadlines set by the Court. Likewise, if
he elects to proceed in this case without an attorney, he is responsible for complying with all
deadlines set by the Court and responding to any requests for relief by other parties, see E.D. Tenn.
L.R. 7.1. Plaintiff, like any other party, will be expected to comply with the Federal Rules of Civil
Procedure, the Local Rules, and the Court’s orders.
Case 3:24-cv-00053-TAV-JEM Document 28 Filed 11/24/25 Page 3 of 4 PageID
#: <pageID>

4
The Court DIRECTS the Clerk’s Office to mail a copy of this Memorandum and Order to
Defendants at the address provided in the motion and to update ECF accordingly.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
ENTER:
_____________________________
Jill E. McCook
United States Magistrate Judge
Case 3:24-cv-00053-TAV-JEM Document 28 Filed 11/24/25 Page 4 of 4 PageID
#: <pageID>