Deans v. County of Santa Cruz et al

Filing 12

Order by Magistrate Judge Howard R. Lloyd granting 9 Plaintiff's Counsel's Motion to Withdraw as Attorney. 6/21/2011 motion hearing vacated. Attorney Stuart Colin Brown terminated.(hrllc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/14/2011)

1
2

*E-FILED 06-14-2011*

3
4
5
6
NOT FOR CITATION

8

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10

SAN JOSE DIVISION

11
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

7

No. C11-00750 HRL

ARTHUR DEANS,

12

Plaintiff,
ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S
COUNSEL’S MOTION TO WITHDRAW

v.
13
14

COUNTY OF SANTA CRUZ; PHIL WOWAK;
STEVE ROBBINS; and DOES 1 TO 50,
[Docket No. 9]

15

Defendants.
/

16
17

Plaintiff’s attorney, S. Colin Brown, moves for permission to withdraw as counsel of

18

record. The motion is unopposed. This court deems the matter appropriate for determination

19

without oral argument, and the June 21, 2011 hearing is vacated. CIV. L.R. 7-1(b). Having

20

considered the moving papers, the motion to withdraw is granted.

21

“Counsel may not withdraw from an action until relieved by order of Court after written

22

notice has been given reasonably in advance to the client and to all other parties who have

23

appeared in the case.” CIV. L.R. 11-5(a). “In the Northern District of California, the conduct of

24

counsel is governed by the standards of professional conduct required of members of the State

25

Bar of California, including the Rules of Professional Conduct of the State Bar of California.”

26

Hill Design Group v. Wang, No. C04-521 JF (RS), 2006 WL 3591206 at *4 (N.D. Cal., Dec.

27

11, 2006) (citing Elan Transdermal Limited v. Cygnus Therapeutic Systems, 809 F. Supp. 1383,

28

1387 (N.D. Cal.1992)). Those standards provide that an attorney may seek permission to

1

withdraw if, among other things, the client breaches an agreement or obligation to the attorney

2

with respect to payment of expenses or fees, or if the client’s conduct renders it unreasonably

3

difficult for the attorney to represent the client effectively. Id. (citing Cal. Rules of Professional

4

Conduct Rule 3-700(C)(1)(d), (f)).
Based upon all the papers filed, Mr. Brown will be permitted to withdraw. The record

5
6

presented indicates that, just prior to the removal of this action, plaintiff Arthur Deans agreed to

7

Mr. Brown’s withdrawal and executed a Substitution of Attorney form, indicating that Deans

8

will proceed in this litigation on a pro se basis. (Brown Decl., Ex. A). This court will use the

9

contact information listed for plaintiff on that form.
Inasmuch as he is representing himself, plaintiff is reminded that he retains all the

11
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10

obligations of a litigant and must (a) timely file papers with the court, (b) meet court-ordered

12

deadlines, and (c) make scheduled court appearances. The fact that plaintiff is representing

13

himself does not absolve him of the responsibility to diligently prosecute his case and to adhere

14

to rules that all litigants are required to follow. See King v. Atiyeh, 814 F.2d 565, 567 (9th Cir.

15

1987) (finding that pro per litigants must follow the same procedural rules as represented

16

parties).

17
18

SO ORDERED.
Dated:

June 14, 2011

19
HOWARD R. LLOYD
20

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2

1

5:11-cv-00750-HRL Notice has been electronically mailed to:

2

Clyde A. Thompson

3

Rebecca S. Widen

4

Stuart Colin Brown

5

Counsel are responsible for distributing copies of this document to co-counsel who have not
registered for e-filing under the court’s CM/ECF program.

[e-mail], [e-mail]
[e-mail], [e-mail]
[e-mail]

6
7

5:11-cv-00750-HRL Notice mailed to

8

Arthur Deans
833 Front Street #236
Santa Cruz, CA 95060

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
3