Doyle also admits that he met with Toren in November 1999, but states that the meeting was irrelevant to this litigation. In an affidavit, Glatzer states that AKO intends to proceed pro se in this matter, and confirms that Doyle did not participate in AKO's decision not to pay plaintiff. Glatzer further states that Doyle has no personal or unique knowledge of any issues in the case, and that other AKO personnel, many of whom are no longer with the firm, dealt with plaintiff regarding Toren's compensation. AKO also argues that, because it intends to appear pro se , DR 5-102 does not apply, and that plaintiff has not established either that Doyle's testimony is necessary, or that his projected testimony would be adverse to AKO's interests. P.C. The threshold issue is whether AKO can be represented by its member attorneys, although they cannot be held personally liable in this action.
Corporations can use outside counsel or staff counsel for appearances.
A professional corporation of attorneys can appear by its member lawyers. In Austrian , the plaintiff, a professional corporation of attorneys, moved for summary judgment upon a promissory note. Defendant objected to plaintiff appearing pro se , but the Court permitted plaintiff to represent itself. 87 Misc.2d at 26. There must therefore be a designated spokesman accountable to the Court.