American Western Home Insurance Company v. Johnson et al

Filing 56

ORDER denying 53 Motion to Withdraw as Attorney; denying 54 Motion for Extension of Time to File Dispositive Motions. Signed by Honorable Susan O. Hickey on September 15, 2015. (mll)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS
TEXARKANA DIVISION
AMERICAN WESTERN HOME INSURANCE
COMPANY

VS.

PLAINTIFF

CASE NO. 11-CV-4071

STEVE JOHNSON,
et al

DEFENDANTS
ORDER

Before the Court is a Motion to Withdraw (ECF No. 53) filed on behalf of John Rogers,
attorney for Separate Defendants Cherry Hill Printing, Inc., and Don Wolf. Also before the
Court is a Motion for Extension of Time to File Dispositive Motions (ECF No. 54) filed on
behalf of Separate Defendants Cherry Hill Printing, Inc. and Don Wolf. Plaintiff has filed a
response (ECF No. 55) to the Motion for Extension of Time. The Court finds these matters ripe
for consideration.
Separate Defendants’ attorney, John Rogers, states that he “undertook counsel
representation of Separate Defendants in this matter due to his representation of clients in a
closely related federal case, Kolbek, et. al v. Twenty-First Century Holiness Tabernacle Church
et al., 4:10-cv-04124.” John Rogers now requests that he be permitted to withdraw because
“further representation in this matter is substantially beyond the scope of the representation
undertaken on behalf of Separate Defendants” in the related Kolbek case. Mr. Rogers also states
that he has not received compensation for his continued representation of Separate Defendants in
this matter. Along with his Motion to Withdraw, Mr. Rogers has filed a Motion for Extension on
behalf of Separate Defendants requesting that their deadline to file dispositive motions be
extended so that they might have the opportunity to find new representation.

Upon consideration of the motions (ECF Nos. 53-54), the Court finds that they should be
and hereby are DENIED. This litigation has been pending for several years, and the September
18 deadline for filing dispositive motions is quickly approaching. The Court declines to extend
these deadlines any further. To allow Mr. Rogers to withdraw at this particular time would be
highly prejudicial to Separate Defendants because it would leave them without adequate time
find an attorney to respond to dispositive motions filed by Plaintiff or to file dispositive motions
on their behalf, if necessary. Mr. Rogers may refile his Motion to Withdraw after the dispositive
motions period, and the Court will reconsider whether withdrawal might be appropriate at that
time.
IT IS SO ORDERED, this 15th day of September, 2015.
/s/ Susan O. Hickey
Susan O. Hickey
United States District Judge

2