Helm v. Freedom Mortgage Corporation et al

Filing 6

ORDER Granting 5 MOTION to Withdraw and Cancelling 4 Telephonic Status Conference. Signed by District Judge Matthew F. Leitman. (HMon)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
SOUTHERN DIVISION
RODNEY HELM,
Plaintiff,

Case No. 15-cv-12394
Hon. Matthew F. Leitman

v.
FREEDOM MORTGAGE CORPORATION et al.
Defendants.
__________________________________________________________________/
ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO WITHDRAW (ECF #5) AND
CANCELLING TELEPHONIC STATUS CONFERENCE (ECF #4)
On May 21, 2015, Plaintiff Rodney Helm (“Plaintiff”) filed this mortgageforeclosure action against Defendants in the Lapeer County Circuit Court. (See
ECF #1-2.) Plaintiff was represented by attorney Steven B. Ruza (“Ruza”). (See
id.) Defendants removed Plaintiff’s action to this Court on July 2, 2015. (See ECF
#1.)
On July 10, 2015, Ruza filed a motion to withdraw as counsel for Plaintiff
(the “Motion to Withdraw”). (See ECF #5.) Ruza informs the Court in the Motion
to Withdraw that Michigan’s 48th District Court has ordered him “to not represent
parties relating to foreclosures.” (Id. at 2, Pg. ID 53.) Ruza says has therefore has
“informed [his clients] by mail of alternative counsel that is available to take over
[his] caseload.” (Id.) Ruza has attached to the Motion to Withdraw the letter he
sent to his clients (see ECF #5-2) and a copy of the 48th District Court’s criminal
1

docket which shows that Ruza has been charged with three counts of false
pretenses and has been enjoined from representing individuals in foreclosurerelated matters. (See ECF #5-1.) In addition, Ruza has provided the Court a June
30, 2015, order from the Lapeer County Circuit Court allowing Ruza to withdraw
as Plaintiff’s counsel. (See ECF #5-3.)
Plaintiff has not responded or otherwise objected to the Motion to Withdraw.
Nor has Defendant. But given the pending criminal charges against Ruza, the 48th
District Court’s order prohibiting Ruza from representing individuals like Plaintiff,
and the Lapeer County Circuit Court’s order allowing Ruza to withdraw as
Plaintiff’s counsel, the Court concludes that Ruza should be allowed to withdraw
as counsel for Plaintiff in this matter.
Accordingly, the Court GRANTS the Motion to Withdraw (ECF #5.) The
Court FURTHER ORDERS the following:
 Plaintiff shall have until August 24, 2015, to obtain new counsel and have
new counsel file an appearance in this action. If no such appearance is
filed, the Court will presume that Plaintiff intends to proceed pro se in this
matter.
 By no later than July 24, 2015, Ruza shall send a letter to Plaintiff
enclosing a copy of this Order and explaining to Plaintiff the Court’s
requirement that Plaintiff has until August 24, 2015, to obtain new counsel

2

and have new counsel file an appearance in this action. Ruza shall also
file a Proof of Service with the Court no later than July 31, 2015,
indicating that this letter was timely sent to Plaintiff.
 The previously-scheduled July 17, 2015, telephonic status conference (see
ECF #4) is CANCELLED.
 Until further notice of the Court, the parties shall not serve discovery,
responses to discovery, or disclosures, and shall not file any motions,
responses to motions, or responsive pleadings.

s/Matthew F. Leitman
MATTHEW F. LEITMAN
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Dated: July 16, 2015
I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was served upon the
parties and/or counsel of record on July 16, 2015, by electronic means and/or
ordinary mail.
s/Holly A. Monda
Case Manager
[phone]

3