Meyers v. Prison Health Services et al

Filing 88

ORDER FOR FURTHER SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE by Judge Thelton Henderson denying without prejudice 78 Motion to Withdraw as Attorney. (tehlc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 7/19/2012)

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

2

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

3
4
5

LEON L. MEYERS,

6

Plaintiff,

7

v.

8

ALAMEDA COUNTY PRISON
HEALTH SERVICES, et al.,

NO. C09-04643 TEH
ORDER FOR FURTHER
SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE

9
Defendant.
11
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10
On May 10, 2012, counsel for Plaintiff Leon Meyers moved to withdraw, citing
12
fundamental differences of opinion between counsel and Plaintiff with regards to the
13
handling of the case, and an overall breakdown in the attorney-client relationship. On May
14
16, 2012, this Court issued an order requiring a response from Plaintiff Leon L. Meyers,
15
which the Court received on May 24, 2012, well ahead of the set filing deadline. Plaintiff’s
16
counsel responded on June 14, 2012, and on July 2, 2012, an in camera hearing was held to
17
further examine the issues raised by counsel in their motion to withdraw.
18
The Court has devoted considerable thought to this matter, carefully considering the
19
briefs of counsel, the statements of Plaintiff, and conferring with Magistrate Judge Vadas,
20
who oversaw prior settlement discussions in this case. After a thorough review of the record,
21
it does not appear that the differences between Plaintiff and his counsel are quite so
22
irreconcilable as the motion of counsel suggests, and therefore the Court has determined that
23
the most productive and efficient course of action in this case would be for the parties to
24
engage in one further attempt at settlement.
25
The parties are therefore directed to schedule one further settlement conference with
26
Judge Vadas, at his convenience and at the convenience of the parties involved. The motion
27
28

1 to withdraw is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. A further settlement conference shall be
2 scheduled and held within 90 days of the issuance of this Order.
3

If, after the further conference is held, settlement remains elusive, and counsel still

4 feels that withdrawal is the appropriate course of action, then counsel is welcome to re-file
5 their motion for withdraw, and the Court will reconsider whether withdrawal is appropriate.
6
7
8 IT IS SO ORDERED.
9

11
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10 Dated: 7/18/12
THELTON E. HENDERSON, JUDGE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2