Giraldes v. Beard

Filing 32

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Carolyn K. Delaney on 08/26/15 denying 29 Motion for substitution of counsel. The discovery deadline in this action is extended to 10/14/15. The dispositive motion deadline in this action is extended to 12/18/15. (Plummer, M)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

LARRY GIRALDES,

12
13
14

No. 2:14-cv-1780 CKD P

Plaintiff,
v.

ORDER

JEFFREY BEARD,

15

Defendant.

16
17

Before the court is plaintiff’s July 15, 2015 motion for substitution of counsel. (ECF No.

18

29.) In it, he asserts that “serious and irreconcilable conflict” exists between him and his

19

attorney. (Id.) Plaintiff further asserts that “[t]he outcome desired by counsel, and the outcome

20

desired by plaintiff, are at odds” and requests that the court appoint another attorney to represent

21

him. (Id.)

22

On August 12, 2015, the court ordered plaintiff’s counsel to respond to plaintiff’s

23

assertions. (ECF No. 30.) Plaintiff’s appointed pro bono counsel, Mr. Reinach, has filed a

24

response. (ECF No. 31.)

25

Having reviewed this response, the court concludes that the conflict between plaintiff and

26

his appointed counsel mainly concerns legal strategy and timing; that Mr. Reinach has experience

27

litigating the issues in this lawsuit; and that he is diligently acting on plaintiff’s behalf, although

28

distance and scheduling issues have made in-person contact difficult. As it appears that plaintiff’s
1

1

interests would be best served by continuing to retain Mr. Reinach, the court will deny plaintiff’s

2

motion for substitution of counsel.1

3
4

Good cause appearing, the court will also extend the discovery and dispositive motion
deadlines. (See ECF No. 31.)

5

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT:

6

1. Plaintiff’s motion for substitution of counsel (ECF No. 29) is denied;

7

2. The discovery deadline in this action is extended to October 14, 2015.

8

3. The dispositive motion deadline in this action is extended to December 18, 2015.

9

Dated: August 26, 2015

_____________________________________
CAROLYN K. DELANEY
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

10
11
12
13
14

2/gira1780.ord(2)

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

1

Plaintiff may renew his motion, but is cautioned that courts may decline to appoint counsel
where a litigant has acted irresponsibly or unreasonably toward his or her prior counsel. Hill v.
Hall, 818 F. Supp. 269, 272 (E.D. Wisc. 1993).
2