Atkins v. Mabus

Filing 55

ORDER Granting 51 Grady and Associates' Motion to Withdraw as Counsel of Record for Plaintiff Gary Atkins. Attorney Dennis M Grady and Garrett A. Smee terminated. The Clerk of the Court shall indicate on the docket that Plaintiff is now proceeding pro se. Signed by Judge Gonzalo P. Curiel on 2/27/17. (All non-registered users served via U.S. Mail Service)(dlg)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

GARY ATKINS,

Case No.: 3:12-cv-01390-GPC-WVG
Plaintiff,

12
13

v.

14

ORDER GRANTING GRADY AND
ASSOCIATES’ MOTION TO
WITHDRAW AS COUNSEL OF
RECORD FOR PLAINTIFF GARY
ATKINS

RAYMOND E. MABUS, Secretary,
Department of the Navy,

15
16

Defendant.
[ECF No. 51.]

17
18

On February 2, 2017, Grady and Associates, counsel of record for Plaintiff Gary

19

Atkins (“Plaintiff”), filed a motion to withdraw as counsel of record on grounds that

20

Plaintiff has terminated the attorney-client relationship. (Dkt. No. 51.) No opposition

21

has been filed. The Court deems this motion suitable for disposition without oral

22

argument pursuant to Civil Local Rule 7.1(d)(1). Having reviewed Defendant’s motion

23

and the applicable law, and for the reasons set forth below, the Court GRANTS Grady

24

and Associates’ motion to withdraw as counsel of record for Plaintiff.

25
26
27
28

1
3:12-cv-01390-GPC-WVG

1

DISCUSSION
“An attorney may not withdraw as counsel except by leave of court.” Darby v.

2
3

City of Torrance, 810 F. Supp. 275, 276 (C.D. Cal. 1992). The trial court has discretion

4

whether to grant or deny an attorney’s motion to withdraw in a civil case. See La Grand

5

v. Stewart, 133 F.3d 1253, 1269 (9th Cir. 1998); Stewart v. Boeing Co., No. CV 12-5621

6

RSWL(AGRx), 2013 WL 3168269, at *1 (C.D. Cal. June 19, 2013). Courts should

7

consider the following factors when ruling upon a motion to withdraw as counsel: (1) the

8

reasons why withdrawal is sought; (2) the prejudice withdrawal may cause to other

9

litigants; (3) the harm withdrawal might cause to the administration of justice; and (4) the

10

degree to which withdrawal will delay the resolution of the case. Curtis v. Illumination

11

Arts, Inc., No. C12-0991JLR, 2014 WL 556010, at *4 (W.D. Wash. Feb. 12, 2014); Deal

12

v. Countrywide Home Loans, No. C09-01643 SBA, 2010 WL 3702459, at *2 (N.D. Cal.

13

Sept. 15, 2010).

14

Local Civil Rule 83.3(f)(3) also provides:

15

Withdrawals. (a) A notice of motion to withdraw as attorney of record must be
served on the adverse party and on the moving attorney’s client. (b) A declaration
pertaining to such service must be filed. Failure to make service as required by
this section or to file the required declaration of service will result in a denial of the
motion.

16
17
18
19

CivLR 83.3(f)(3). Here, Grady and Associates has filed a certificate of service which

20

indicates that the motion was served on his client and to opposing counsel. (Dkt. No. 51-

21

3.)

22

Rule 3-700 of the California Rules of Professional Conduct of the State Bar of

23

California provides that an attorney may request a withdrawal if the client knowingly and

24

freely assents to termination of the employment. Cal. R. Prof. Conduct 3-700(C)(5).

25
26
27
28

2
3:12-cv-01390-GPC-WVG

1

According to the motion to withdraw, Plaintiff has terminated the attorney-client

2

relationship between himself and Grady and Associates, Plaintiff’s counsel of record.

3

(Dkt. No. 51-1.) Grady and Associates states that withdrawal should not cause undue

4

delay, as the depositions of the key witnesses have been rescheduled due to witness

5

unavailability. (Id.)

6

Based on the moving papers and a review of the case, the Court concludes that the

7

withdrawal will not prejudice litigants, harm the administration of justice, or unduly

8

delay the resolution of the case. No prejudice has been shown, as no party has opposed

9

the motion to withdraw. Based on the above, the Court GRANTS Grady and Associates’

10
11
12
13
14

motion to withdraw as counsel of record for Plaintiff.
The Clerk of the Court shall indicate on the docket that Plaintiff is now proceeding
pro se with the following address and provide Plaintiff with a copy of this Order.
Gary Atkins
704 Marbella Circle
Chula Vista, CA 91910

15
16
17

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: February 27, 2017

18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

3
3:12-cv-01390-GPC-WVG