Left Coast Wrestling, LLC. v. Dearborn International, LLC. et al
Filing
56
ORDER Requiring Substitution of Counsel. Le's new counsel must promptly file an ex parte motion to substitute in as counsel in place of Le, and the motion must be signed by them as well as by Le. Signed by Judge Larry Alan Burns on 7/24/2018.(All non-registered users served via U.S. Mail Service)(jdt)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11
LEFT COAST WRESTLING, LLC,
Case No.: 17cv466-LAB (NLS)
Plaintiff,
12
13
v.
14
ORDER REQUIRING
SUBSTITUTION OF COUNSEL
DEARBORN INT'L LLC,
Defendant.
15
16
17
On July 31, 2017, counsel for Dearborn International and Duke Minh Le moved to
18
withdraw as counsel of record, without naming new counsel. (Docket no. 17.) The Court
19
ordered Dearborn and Le to respond. (Docket no. 18.) The order pointed out that, if his
20
counsel were permitted to withdraw, Le would be “proceeding pro se (without
21
representation), unless and until he substitutes in new counsel.” (Id. at 1:18–21.) It also
22
pointed out that Dearborn cannot proceed pro se, and warned that it “should be prepared
23
to substitute in new counsel promptly.” (Id. at 1:23–24.) Otherwise, the order cautioned,
24
Dearborn would likely forfeit its counterclaim and default on the claims brought against
25
it. “In short,” the order warned, “it will be submitting to a default judgment and will lose
26
the entire case.” (Id. at 1:25–26.) The Court also specifically warned Dearborn and Le
27
that they should “arrange to monitor the docket to keep abreast of any new filings or
28
orders.” (Id. at 2:5–6.)
1
17cv466-LAB (NLS)
1
The order referred to substitution of new counsel because that is what this
2
District’s Civil Local Rules require. See Civil Local Rule 83.1(f)(2). Instead of doing
3
that, however, two attorneys filed a notice stating that they were entering an appearance
4
on behalf of Le, and purporting to direct that further notices and documents be served on
5
them instead of on Le personally. The notice implies that Le has retained them and
6
approves their substituting in, in place of him, but it does not actually say so and it was
7
not signed by Le.
8
Before proceeding for Le, his new counsel need to substitute in properly, by means
9
of an ex parte motion to substitute them in, in place of Le. While the Court has no reason
10
to doubt counsel’s good faith in this, it is important to document that Le he understands
11
and agrees these will be his new attorneys. He would not be permitted to file anything or
12
make any appearances; all that would have to be done by his new counsel. See Civil Local
13
Rule 83.1(f)(1). And if for any reason he wanted to change counsel or proceed pro se
14
again, he would first need to obtain the Court’s approval. See Civil Local Rule 83.1(f)(2)
15
and (3).
16
Le’s new counsel must promptly file an ex parte motion to substitute in as counsel
17
in place of Le, and the motion must be signed by them as well as by Le. Any opposition
18
to the motion must be filed within two court days.
19
Le’s new counsel have already filed an opposition to Plaintiff’s ex parte motion to
20
alter or amend the judgment. That motion is being denied for other reasons, so the Court
21
had no need to rely on the opposition, and there is no need to strike it from the docket at
22
this time.
23
Counsel for both parties should also bear in mind that motions need to be filed as
24
early as reasonably possible, and well in advance of the time when a ruling is needed. See
25
Oakland Tribune, Inc. v. Chronicle Pub. Co., Inc. 762 F.2d 1374, 1377 (9th Cir. 1985)
26
(delay in seeking relief implies a lack of urgency). They should also bear in mind that
27
whether a matter is urgent and should be expedited is generally a disputed issue and should
28
2
17cv466-LAB (NLS)
1
not be the subject of ex parte communications. The Court intends to afford both parties a
2
fair opportunity to be heard before it acts.
3
4
5
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: July 24, 2018
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3
17cv466-LAB (NLS)
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?