Martin v. DeepRock Manufacturing

Filing 24

ORDER by Magistrate Judge Howard R. Lloyd conditionally granting 17 defense counsel's motion to withdraw. (hrllc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/13/2016)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10

SAN JOSE DIVISION

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
MICHAEL MARTIN,

12

Case No. 5:16-cv-02182-HRL

Plaintiff,

13
v.

14

DEEPROCK MANUFACTURING,

15

Defendant.

16

ORDER CONDITIONALLY
GRANTING DEFENSE COUNSEL’S
MOTION TO WITHDRAW
Re: Dkt. No. 17

Ginn & Crosby LLC (Ginn & Crosby) move for permission to withdraw as counsel of

17
18

record for defendant DeepRock LLC (DeepRock).1 Defense counsel attests that the firm provided

19

advanced written notice to DeepRock of counsel’s intent to withdraw from this matter and that

20

DeepRock authorized Ginn & Crosby to proceed with the present motion. (Dkt. 17-1, Ginn Decl.

21

¶ 7). The instant motion was also served on counsel for plaintiff, who objects to the requested

22

withdrawal. Upon consideration of the moving and responding papers, as well as the oral

23

arguments presented, the court conditionally grants the motion as follows:
“Counsel may not withdraw from an action until relieved by order of Court after written

24
25

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

26

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

27
28

1

DeepRock says that it erroneously was sued as “DeepRock Manufacturing.”

1

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

2

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

3

Design Group v. Wang, No. C04-521 JF (RS), 2006 WL 3591206 at *4 (N.D. Cal., Dec. 11, 2006)

4

(citing Elan Transdermal Limited v. Cygnus Therapeutic Systems, 809 F. Supp. 1383, 1387 (N.D.

5

Cal.1992)). Those standards provide that an attorney may seek permission to withdraw under

6

certain circumstances, and that an attorney must withdraw under others. An attorney may seek

7

leave to withdraw if:

8

(1) The client

9

11
United States District Court
Northern District of California

10

(a) insists upon presenting a claim or defense that is not warranted
under existing law and cannot be supported by good faith argument
for an extension, modification, or reversal of existing law, or
(b) seeks to pursue an illegal course of conduct, or

12

(c) insists that the member pursue a course of conduct that is illegal
or that is prohibited under these rules or the State Bar Act, or

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

(d) by other conduct renders it unreasonably difficult for the
member to carry out the employment effectively, or
(e) insists, in a matter not pending before a tribunal, that the member
engage in conduct that is contrary to the judgment and advice of the
member but not prohibited under these rules or the State Bar Act, or
(f) breaches an agreement or obligation to the member as to
expenses or fees.
(2) The continued employment is likely to result in a violation of these rules
or of the State Bar Act; or
(3) The inability to work with co-counsel indicates that the best interests of
the client likely will be served by withdrawal; or
(4) The member’s mental or physical condition renders it difficult for the
member to carry out the employment effectively; or
(5) The client knowingly and freely assents to termination of the
employment; or
(6) The member believes in good faith, in a proceeding pending before a
tribunal, that the tribunal will find the existence of other good cause for
withdrawal.
Cal. Rule of Prof’l Conduct 3-700(C). Withdrawal is mandatory, however, where:
(1) The member knows or should know that the client is bringing an action,
2

1
2
3
4
5

conducting a defense, asserting a position in litigation, or taking an
appeal, without probable cause and for the purpose of harassing or
maliciously injuring any person; or
(2) The member knows or should know that continued employment will
result in violation of these rules or of the State Bar Act; or
(3) The member’s mental or physical condition renders it unreasonably
difficult to carry out the employment effectively.
Cal. Rule of Prof’l Conduct 3-700(B).

6
Here, defense counsel avers that at least one of the bases for permissive or mandatory
7
withdrawal apply in this case. (Ginn Decl. ¶ 14). This matter being in its relatively early stages,
8
the court finds that any possible prejudice is minimal. Plaintiff objects solely on the ground that
9
corporate entities cannot proceed without an attorney. While that is true, this court finds sufficient
10
grounds for withdrawal, and therefore grants the motion, subject to the condition that papers may
11
United States District Court
Northern District of California

continue to be served on Ginn & Crosby LLC for forwarding purposes, unless and until DeepRock
12
appears by other counsel. Civ. L.R. 11-5(b).
13
DeepRock is advised that it may not appear pro se or through its corporate officers,
14

but must retain new counsel forthwith to represent it in this lawsuit. See Civ. L.R. 3-9(b) (“A

15
corporation, unincorporated association, partnership or other such entity may appear only through
16
17
18
19
20

a member of the bar of this Court”); see also Rowland v. California Men’s Colony, 506 U.S. 194,
201-02 (1993) (“It has been the law for the better part of two centuries . . . that a corporation may
appear in the federal courts only through licensed counsel”); In Re Highley, 459 F.2d 554, 555
(9th Cir. 1972) (“A corporation can appear in a court proceeding only through an attorney at
law”). Defense counsel represents that defendant has been advised of the scheduled deadlines and

21
appearances in this matter. DeepRock is further advised that it retains all of the obligations of
22
a litigant, and its failure to retain an attorney may lead to an order striking its pleadings or
23
to entry of its default.
24
Ginn & Crosby is directed to serve a copy of this order on DeepRock and to file a proof of
25
26
27
28
3

1

service with the court.2

2

SO ORDERED.

3

Dated: September 13, 2016

4
5
HOWARD R. LLOYD
United States Magistrate Judge

6
7
8
9
10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
2

28

The court will also send a copy of this order to the address provided by defense counsel as
defendant’s last known address.
4

1

5:16-cv-02182-HRL Notice has been electronically mailed to:

2

Shanti Michaels

[e-mail]

3

Steven Whitefield Ritcheson
[e-mail]

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

4
5
6
7

5:16-cv-02182-HRL Notice sent by U.S. Mail to:
Roy Crush
2129 South VW Goodwin Blvd.
Marquez, TX 77865

8
9
10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
5