Dumas v. Hurley Medical Center et al

Filing 164

ORDER STRIKING 159 Petition filed by Lowana Shanell Dumas for Removal of Counsel [E-Filer]. Signed by District Judge Robert H. Cleland. (LWag)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION LOWANA SHANELL DUMAS, Plaintiff, v. Case No. 10-12661 HURLEY MEDICAL CENTER, et al., Defendants. / ORDER STRIKING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR REMOVAL OF COUNSEL Plaintiff Lowana Dumas moves for the court to remove her pro bono counsel, Racine Miller. Plaintiff asserts that there has been a breakdown in the attorney-client relationship in that counsel has breached Plaintiff’s trust and the two are no longer communicating effectively. Plaintiff has asked counsel to withdraw from the case, but Plaintiff claims that counsel does not want to withdraw because counsel will not receive payment for her services if she does so. Plaintiff states that her motion, if granted, will both sever the attorney-client relationship and ensure that counsel receives payment. A plaintiff may not file a motion to remove her attorney from a case. If an attorney wishes to withdraw from representation, the attorney must file an appropriate motion. See MRPC 1.16(b)(6). The attorney-client relationship between Plaintiff and counsel may have deteriorated to the point that it should be terminated. However, the court will not consider the merits of the issue until counsel moves to withdraw. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff’s motion for “removal of pro bono counsel” [Dkt. # 159] is STRICKEN. s/Robert H. Cleland ROBERT H. CLELAND UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Dated: December 17, 2012 I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was mailed to counsel of record on this date, December 17, 2012, by electronic and/or ordinary mail. s/Lisa Wagner Case Manager and Deputy Clerk (313) 234-5522 S:\Cleland\JUDGE'S DESK\C1 ORDERS\10-12661.DUMAS.Strike.Removal.Counsel.wpd 2

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?