McGill v. The Home Depot, Inc.

Filing 32

ORDER by Judge Kandis A. Westmore granting Plaintiff's counsel's 26 Motion to Withdraw as Attorney. Per Civil L.R. 11-5(b), all papers from the court and from other parties shall continue to be served on plaintiffs counsel for forwarding purposes until a substitution of counsel is filed. (kawlc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/22/2016)

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

6
7

JOSEPH G. MCGILL,

Case No. 15-cv-03029-KAW

Plaintiff,
8

ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF'S
COUNSEL’S MOTION TO WITHDRAW
AS COUNSEL OF RECORD

v.
9
10

THE HOME DEPOT, INC.,

Re: Dkt. No. 26

Defendant.

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12

Presently, Plaintiff Joseph G. McGill is represented by attorneys Thomas G. Del Beccaro

13

and Robert R. Pohls. On November 17, 2015, counsel moved to withdraw. (Mot., Dkt. No. 26.)

14

Counsel states that, for over sixth months, Plaintiff has failed to communicate with counsel despite

15

numerous attempts to contact him via telephone, email, text messages, and U.S. Mail. (Decl. of

16

Thomas G. Del Beccaro, “Del Beccaro Decl.,” Dkt. No. 26 at 5 ¶ 3.) Counsel served copies of the

17

motion on Plaintiff via U.S. Mail. (Certificate of Service, Dkt. No. 26 at 7.) Plaintiff did not file

18

an opposition to the motion to withdraw.

19
20
21

The Court held a hearing on the motion on January 21, 2016. Attorney Thomas G. Del
Beccaro appeared at the hearing. Plaintiff did not appear.
Under Civil Local Rule 11-5(a), “[c]ounsel may not withdraw from an action until relieved

22

by order of Court after written notice has been given reasonably in advance to the client and to all

23

other parties who have appeared in the case.” The local rules further provide that if the client does

24

not consent to the withdrawal and no substitution of counsel is filed, the motion to withdraw shall

25

be granted on the condition that all papers from the court and from the opposing party shall

26

continue to be served on that party’s current counsel for forwarding purposes until the client

27

appears by other counsel or pro se if the client is not a corporate entity. Civil L.R. 11-5(b).

28

Withdrawal is governed by the California Rules of Professional Conduct. See Nehad v.

1

Mukasey, 535 F.3d 962, 970 (9th Cir. 2008) (applying California Rules of Professional Conduct to

2

attorney withdrawal). Under California Rule of Professional Conduct 3-700(C), an attorney may

3

request permission to withdraw if the client breaches an agreement or obligation to its counsel as

4

to expenses or fees, or if the client engages in “other conduct [that] renders it unreasonably

5

difficult for the member to carry out the employment effectively,” such as a client’s failure to

6

communicate with his attorney. Cal. Rules of Prof’l Conduct R. 3-700(C)(1)(d).
The Court has discretion regarding whether to grant a motion to withdraw, and an

8

attorney’s request to withdraw should be denied “where such withdrawal would work an injustice

9

or cause undue delay in the proceeding.” Gong v. City of Alameda, No. C 03-05495 TEH, 2008

10

WL 160964, at *1 (N.D. Cal. Jan. 8, 2008) (no prejudice or undue delay to client where counsel

11
United States District Court
Northern District of California

7

provided sufficient notice of its intent to withdraw and where no trial date had yet been set in the

12

case). Here, the Court finds that good cause exists to grant the motion to withdraw. Counsel has

13

attested that Plaintiff has failed to communicate with him despite counsel’s efforts to reach him

14

using various forms of communication since April 2015. (Del Beccaro Decl. ¶ 3.) This is a valid

15

ground for withdrawal. Furthermore, although Plaintiff has been served with counsel’s motion to

16

withdraw, he did not object to the motion nor did he appear at the hearing to contest the motion to

17

withdrawal. Lastly, there is no showing that withdrawal would work an injustice or cause undue

18

delay, as the pleadings are already settled and the court has not yet entered an order setting a trial

19

date and related case management deadlines.

20

Accordingly, counsel’s motion to withdraw is granted, and attorneys Thomas G. Del

21

Beccaro and Robert R. Pohls are relieved as counsel of record. Since Plaintiff Joseph G. McGill

22

has not consented to the withdrawal and no substitution of counsel has been filed, all papers from

23

the court and from other parties shall continue to be served on plaintiff’s counsel for forwarding

24

purposes until a substitution of counsel is filed. See Civil L.R. 11-5(b).

25
26

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: January 22, 2016
__________________________________
KANDIS A. WESTMORE
United States Magistrate Judge

27
28
2