Patel et al v. Trivedi et al
ORDER granting 71 Second Amended Motion to Withdraw as Attorney, denying as moot 68 Motion to Withdraw as Attorney, denying as moot 70 First Amended MOTION to Withdraw as Attorney. Attorney Luther O'Neal Sutter terminated. Signed by Honorable P. K. Holmes, III on July 7, 2014. (mll)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS
NATVERLAL PATEL and JASWANTI PATEL
Case No. 4:10-CV-04195
NEW YORK LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY
Now before the Court is the motion (Doc. 68) by law firm Sutter & Gillham, PLLC to
withdraw as counsel of record for Plaintiffs Natverlal and Jaswanti Patel as well as an amended
motion to withdraw (Doc. 70) and a second amended motion to withdraw (Doc. 71). The Court,
being well and sufficiently advised, finds that the second amended motion (Doc. 71) should be
GRANTED, and Sutter & Gillham, PLLC,1 and specifically the attorney of record, Luther Sutter, is
withdrawn as counsel for the Patels. The original motion (Doc. 68) and first amended motion (Doc.
70) are DENIED AS MOOT.
The first amended motion indicated that Plaintiffs had retained other counsel. However, no
notice of appearance has yet been entered by other counsel for Plaintiffs in this case, and the second
amended motion represented that perhaps other counsel had not actually been hired by Plaintiffs.
In any event, Plaintiffs are hereby ORDERED to have another attorney enter an appearance on their
behalf or, in the alternative, to advise the Court that they wish to represent themselves in this matter
by proceeding without counsel, pro se. Such appearance must be entered or notification received on
or before Monday, August 4, 2014. Plaintiffs are advised that their failure to comply with this
The Court notes that the firm listed for the attorney of record, Luther Sutter, is Harrill &
Sutter, PLLC. The Court assumes that the firm name should be Sutter & Gillham, PLLC, as
represented in Mr. Sutter’s motion. Mr. Sutter is advised to update his contact information on the
order may result in the dismissal of their action for failure to obey a Court order and for
failure to prosecute. If Plaintiffs file with the clerk of court a request for an extension of this
deadline before August 4, 2014, the Court may extend the deadline if the Court finds that there is a
good reason to do so.
Mr. Sutter is directed to provide Plaintiffs with a copy of this order and to file an affidavit
averring service or other proof of compliance with this order on the record.
IT IS SO ORDERED this 7th day of July, 2014.
/s/P. K. Holmes, III
P.K. HOLMES, III
CHIEF U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?