Doe v. Adams et al

Filing 26

ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT TIMOTHY BEACH'S SUBSTITUTION OF ATTORNEY WITHOUT PREJUDICE signed by Magistrate Judge Stanley A. Boone on 1/07/2022. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED Defendant Timothy Beach's request for substitution of attorney is DENIED (ECF No. 25 ), without prejudice to re-filing as a properly-noticed motion to withdraw pursuant to the Local Rules and Rules of Professional Conduct of the State Bar of California. (Gonzales, V)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

JANE DOE,
Plaintiff,

12
13

Case No. 1:21-cv-01103-NONE-SAB
ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT
TIMOTHY BEACH’S SUBSTITUTION OF
ATTORNEY WITHOUT PREJUDICE

v.

14

DERRAL ADAMS, et al.,

15

(ECF No. 25)

Defendants.

16
17

On January 7, 2022, Defendant Timothy Beach filed a notice of substitution of attorney

18 substituting himself as a pro se party for attorney Susan E. Coleman of Burke, Williams &
19 Sorensen, LLP, located at 444 South Flower Street, Suite 2400, Los Angeles, CA 90017. (ECF
20 No. 25.) The Court notes, however, that Mr. Beach is not a licensed attorney in the State of
21 California and pursuant to Local Rule 182(d), his attorney may not withdraw as counsel and leave
22 Mr. Beach in pro per without leave of Court upon noticed motion. E.D. Cal. L.R. 182(d). More
23 specifically, Local Rule 182(d) provides:
24
25
26
27
28

Unless otherwise provided herein, an attorney who has appeared
may not withdraw leaving the client in propria persona without leave
of court upon noticed motion and notice to the client and all other
parties who have appeared. The attorney shall provide an affidavit
stating the current or last known address or addresses of the client
and the efforts made to notify the client of the motion to withdraw.
Withdrawal as attorney is governed by the Rules of Professional
Conduct of the State Bar of California, and the attorney shall
conform to the requirements of those Rules. The authority and duty

1

of the attorney of record shall continue until relieved by order of the
Court issued hereunder. Leave to withdraw may be granted subject
to such appropriate conditions as the Court deems fit.

1
2

3 Id. See also Cal. R. Prof. Conduct 3-700(A)(2); CE Res., Inc. v. Magellan Group, LLC, No. 2:084 cv-02999-MCE-KJM, 2009 WL 3367489, at *1 (E.D. Cal. Oct. 14, 2009); McClintic v. U.S. Postal
5 Serv., No. 1:13-cv-00439, 2014 WL 51151, at *2 (E.D. Cal. Jan. 7, 2014). In light of the foregoing
6 authorities, the Court finds the instant request for substitution does not comply with the Local
7 Rules or Rules of Professional Conduct and must therefore be denied, without prejudice.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendant Timothy Beach’s request for

8

9 substitution of attorney is DENIED (ECF No. 25), without prejudice to re-filing as a properly10 noticed motion to withdraw pursuant to the Local Rules and Rules of Professional Conduct of the
11 State Bar of California.
12
13

IT IS SO ORDERED.
14 Dated:

January 7, 2022
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

2