Fundamental Administrative Services, LLC v. Anderson

Filing 113

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Finding as Moot 68 Motion to Disqualify Counsel; Granting 101 Motion to Withdraw as Attorney. Attorney Steven Neal Leitess terminated. Signed by Judge James K. Bredar on 06/11/0214. (bas, Deputy Clerk) .

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND
*
FUNDAMENTAL ADMIN. SERVS., LLC,

*

Plaintiff

*

v.

*

KRISTI ANDERSON,
Defendant
*
*

CIVIL NO. JKB-13-1708

*
*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Pending before the Court are Plaintiff’s motion to disqualify counsel (ECF No. 68) and a
motion to withdraw as counsel, filed by Leitess Friedberg PC (ECF No. 101). Granting the
motion to withdraw will render moot the motion to disqualify, and the Court will so rule, but
with caveats.
The Court notes that the motion to withdraw has only been filed by Leitess Friedberg PC.
However, the original notice of appearance for Defendant was filed by “Steven N. Leitess and
Leitess Friedberg PC as counsel for the Defendant.” (ECF No. 6.) It is clear that withdrawal of
the firm alone will not counteract the conflict of interest posed by Mr. Leitess’s presence in the
case. Thus, the Court construes the motion as requesting withdrawal of both him and his firm
from the case.
While the Court will grant the termination of appearances by Mr. Leitess and Leitess
Friedberg PC, their request that the firm continue to receive CM/ECF notifications of electronic
filings is denied.

Mr. Leitess and his law firm no longer have a role in the case, and

nonparticipants in a matter are not afforded CM/ECF access, plain and simple.

A complicating factor in this situation is the fact that Defendant Kristi Anderson is now
working as an attorney at the Leitess Friedberg PC firm, so she presumably continues to have
access to Plaintiff’s documents that are included in the files at Leitess Friedberg PC relating to
the firm’s prior representation of Plaintiff. There may also be within the possession of Leitess
Friedberg PC and/or Mr. Leitess documents that pertain to the firm’s former representation of
Plaintiff but that may not be Plaintiff’s original documents (i.e., work product).
The Court notes that both Defendant and her Eccleston and Wolf, P.C., counsel have filed
a certificate of compliance with the Court’s May 1, 2014, order and supporting affidavits. (ECF
No. 103.) Thus, they have represented to the Court that they have produced to Plaintiff all of
Plaintiff’s documents in their possession, except for certain documents identified on Defendant’s
privilege log. They have also represented that they have divested themselves of all copies of
Plaintiff’s documents (other than those associated with the privilege log). However, Mr. Leitess
and Leitess Friedberg PC have not filed a similar certificate of compliance. They must. And
their certificate must address all documents in their possession or to which they have access and
that pertain to their former representation of Plaintiff, not simply documents that are owned by
Plaintiff. As between the former client and the attorney, the greater protection belongs to the
former client, in this case, Plaintiff.
Thus, the Court will condition its ruling permitting withdrawal upon the prompt filing by
Mr. Leitess and Leitess Friedberg PC of their certificate of compliance, which should be
supported by affidavits and which should address all file materials in their possession or to which
they have access where such materials pertain to their prior representation of Plaintiff.
Additionally, the Court assumes that Mr. Leitess and his firm are cognizant of their continuing
ethical obligations to Plaintiff, including their maintaining the confidential and/or privileged

2

nature of information to which Mr. Leitess and his firm became privy by virtue of his prior
representation of Plaintiff. Moreover, Mr. Leitess and Leitess Friedberg PC remain subject to
the full force and effect of all orders entered by the Court in this case prior to their termination as
Defendant’s counsel.
Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED:
1. Construed as a motion to withdraw the appearances of Steven N. Leitess, Esq., and
Leitess Friedberg PC, the motion (ECF No. 101) is GRANTED.
2. Mr. Leitess and Leitess Friedberg PC shall file within 10 days of this order their
certificate of compliance, with supporting affidavits, with the Court’s May 1, 2014, order;
such certificate shall address the Court’s concerns in both the May 1 order and the instant
memorandum and order.
3. Mr. Leitess and Leitess Friedberg PC are TERMINATED as counsel. They shall not
receive notices of electronic filings in the case.
4. Mr. Leitess and Leitess Friedberg PC remain obligated to keep confidential Plaintiff’s
confidential and/or privileged information.
5. Mr. Leitess and Leitess Friedberg PC remain subject to all orders of the Court entered in
the case prior to their withdrawal.
6. Plaintiff’s motion to disqualify counsel (ECF No. 68) is MOOT.
DATED this 11th day of June, 2014.

BY THE COURT:

/s/
James K. Bredar
United States District Judge
3