KPG Investments, Inc. et al v. Sonn

Filing 148

ORDER denying ECF Nos. 141 , 142 Motions to Withdraw as Attorney. Signed by Magistrate Judge Carla Baldwin on 3/27/2024. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - HL)

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

2

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

3

***

4

KPG INVESTMENTS, INC., et al.,

5
6
7

Plaintiffs,
v.

ORDER DENYING MOTION TO
WITHDRAW AS COUNSEL
[ECF Nos. 141, 142]

MARLENA SONN, et al.,

8

Case No. 3:22-CV-00236-ART-CLB

Defendants.

9
10

Before the Court is Siegel, Yee, Brunner & Mehta (“SYBM”) and Hamilton Law’s

11

(“HL”) motion to withdraw as counsel for Defendant Marlena Sonn (“Sonn”). (ECF Nos.

12

141, 142.) The Motion states that irreconcilable differences have arisen rendering

13

effective representation impossible. (Id.) Sonn filed a declaration opposing the motion to

14

withdraw and effectively disputing that irreconcilable differences have arisen. (ECF No.

15

143.) SYBM and HL filed a reply, however, this document did not contest or otherwise

16

dispute Sonn’s representations in her declaration. (ECF No. 144.) Finally, KPG

17

Investments Inc., Kendalle Getty, Alexandra Sarah Getty, ASG Investments, Inc., Minerva

18

Office Management, Inc., and Robert L. Leberman, (collectively referred to as the “Getty

19

Parties”) filed a limited response to the motion to withdraw. (ECF No. 146.)

20

“[A]n attorney cannot withdraw from a case without consent of the court.” Lovvorn

21

v. Johnston, 118 F.2d 704, 706 (9th Cir. 1941). “Courts maintain the discretion to grant

22

or deny a motion to withdraw as counsel.” Williams v. Cnty. of Fresno, 562 F. Supp. 3d

23

1032, 1035 (E.D. Cal. 2021); see also LR IA 11-6(b) (“If an attorney seeks to withdraw

24

after appearing in a case, the attorney must file a motion or stipulation and serve it on the

25

affected client and opposing counsel. The affected client may, but is not required to, file

26

a response to the attorney's motion within 14 days of the filing of the motion, unless the

27

court orders otherwise.”).

28

When an attorney seeks leave from the court to withdraw from a case “in the

1

absence of the client's consent,” the attorney must show that “justifiable cause” exists to

2

do so. Id.; see also McGhee v. Chavez, 2023 WL 2708765, at *1 (D. Ariz. Mar. 30, 2023).

3

The Court considers four factors when ruling on a motion to withdraw: “(1) the reasons

4

why withdrawal is sought; (2) the prejudice withdrawal may cause to other litigants; (3)

5

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

6

which withdrawal will delay the resolution of the case.” Leatt Corp. v. Innovative Safety

7

Tech., LLC, 2010 WL 444708, at *1 (S.D. Cal. Feb. 2, 2010).

8

The Court's analysis will focus on the first factor—the reasons why withdrawal is

9

sought. Leatt Corp., 2010 WL 444708, at *1. It appears to the Court that the main reason

10

counsel feels that irreconcilable differences have arisen between them and their client, in

11

part due to a disagreement related to settlement. (See ECF No. 141.) Considering Sonn's

12

opposition to the withdrawal and her indication that she does not believe irreconcilable

13

differences exist between herself and her counsel, the Court finds that there is not a

14

compelling reason to allow counsel to withdraw against the client's wishes at this time.

15

As counsel has failed to show justifiable cause to withdraw without Sonn's consent,

16

the Court declines to grant counsel's request because doing so could result in injustice to

17

Sonn and further unnecessary delays in this litigation.

18

Accordingly, the motions to withdraw, (ECF Nos. 141, 142), are DENIED without

19

prejudice to refile at a later time if issues between counsel and Sonn persist.

20

March 27, 2024
DATED: ________________.

21
22

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

23
24
25
26
27
28
2