Johnson, et al v. Myers et al

Filing 66

ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS' COUNSEL'S MOTION TO WITHDRAW SUBJECT TO STATED CONDITIONS by Hon. William Alsup granting 50 Motion to Withdraw as Attorney..(whalc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/15/2012)

1
2
3
4
5
6

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
8
9
JAMES R. JOHNSON, et al.,

11
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10

12
13
14
15
16

No. C 11-00092 WHA

Plaintiffs,
v.

ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS’
COUNSEL’S MOTION TO WITHDRAW
SUBJECT TO STATED CONDITIONS

STEVEN L. MYERS, et al.,
Defendants.
/

Plaintiffs are represented in this action by the firm Ropers, Majeski, Kohn, & Bentley

17

(“RMKB”). RMKB filed a motion seeking leave to withdraw as counsel due to the fact that

18

plaintiffs have failed to pay attorney’s fees in an amount that was not disclosed in the motion

19

(Dkt. No. 51). Defendants filed an opposition conditionally opposing the withdrawal of

20

plaintiffs’ counsel prior to the Court’s issuance of an order on a pending motion (Dkt. No. 59).

21

An order issued on March 9, 2012, requesting the presence of plaintiffs at the hearing on the

22

motion to withdraw set for today, March 15.

23

Plaintiff James Johnson was the only plaintiff to appear at the hearing. He represented to

24

the Court that he and the other plaintiffs are “okay with letting their lawyers out” of this case and

25

have already begun seeking new counsel to represent them in this action. Based on this

26

representation, the firm of RMKB will be permitted to withdraw as counsel, but only after the

27

Court issues its order ruling on the pending motion for leave to file an amended complaint. Until

28

that time, plaintiffs’ counsel must continue to perform, in full, their duties as counsel to plaintiffs.

1

After an order issues resolving the motion for leave to file an amended complaint,

2

plaintiffs will have 35 calendar days in which to retain new counsel. If new counsel is not

3

retained within 35 calendar days after the issuance of said order, this case will be dismissed with

4

prejudice, as plaintiffs will not be allowed to proceed pro se in this derivative action.

5
6

IT IS SO ORDERED.

7
8

Dated: March 15, 2012.

WILLIAM ALSUP
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

9

11
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10

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