ABBATE v. WAL-MART STORES EAST, L.P.

Filing 63

ORDER: AND NOW, this this 5th day of February, 2021, the motion to intervene filed by Nicholas, Perot, Smith, Koehler & Wall, P.C., and Michael J. Koehler Esquire ("Intervenors"), ECF No. 61 , shall be, and hereby is, GRANTED for the li mited purpose of allowing the Intervenors to respond to the Defendant's pending motion. The Intervenors' motion is DENIED at this time insofar as it seeks leave to petition this Court for approval of a charging lien. IT IS FURTHER ORDERE D that any interested party or Intervenor wishing to submit a response in further support of, or opposition to, Defendant's pending motion may do so on or before February 16, 2021. The parties may also address jurisdictional or other concerns bearing on the Intervenors' request for leave to petition the undersigned for approval of a charging lien. Signed by Judge Susan Paradise Baxter on 2/5/2021. (esa)

Case 1:17-cv-00288-SPB Document 63 Filed 02/08/21 Page 1 of 2

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
MONICA LEE ABATE,
Plaintiff,
v.
WAL-MART STORES EAST, L.P.
d/b/a WAL-MART STORE #2561,
Defendant.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No. 1:17-cv-288-SPB

ORDER
Pending before the Court in the above-captioned matter is the Defendant’s Motion to
Deposit Disputed Settlement Funds with the Court, ECF No. [60]. Also pending is a motion by
Nicholas, Perot, Smith, Koehler & Wall, P.C., and Michael J. Koehler Esquire to intervene for
the purpose of responding to Defendant’s motion and petitioning this Court to approve a
charging lien, ECF No. [61]. These most recent filings arise out of a fee dispute between the
Plaintiff and Mr. Koehler, her former counsel. The Court previously granted Defendant’s motion
to enforce a settlement that Plaintiff reached with Defendant during the course of Mr. Koehler’s
representation. ECF Nos. [57] and [58]. Defendant now wishes to deposit the remaining
settlement funds with the Court pending resolution of the aforementioned fee issue. Attorney
John Knox remains the attorney of record for Plaintiff but has apparently declined to undertake
Plaintiff’s representation relative to her ongoing dispute with Mr. Koehler. Mr. Knox has
nevertheless taken the position that the settlement funds should be placed in escrow with his
firm, whereas Mr. Koehler requests payment of his fees directly from the Defendant.
Given the already protracted course of this litigation, the Court is somewhat disheartened
that the parties have been unable to reach consensus concerning the proper interim disposition of
1

Case 1:17-cv-00288-SPB Document 63 Filed 02/08/21 Page 2 of 2

the remaining settlement funds. The Court is also cognizant of its limited jurisdiction in matters
that are tangential to the underlying personal injury suit. Nevertheless, in the interest of fairness
and to ensure that all relevant issues are sufficiently joined, the Court will grant Mr. Koehler’s
motion to intervene and will allow all interested parties an opportunity to formally state their
positions on the matters that remain in dispute. To that end,
IT IS ORDERED, this 5th day of February, 2021, that the motion to intervene filed by
Nicholas, Perot, Smith, Koehler & Wall, P.C., and Michael J. Koehler Esquire (“Intervenors”),
ECF No. [61], shall be, and hereby is, GRANTED for the limited purpose of allowing the
Intervenors to respond to the Defendant’s pending motion. The Intervenors’ motion is DENIED
at this time insofar as it seeks leave to petition this Court for approval of a charging lien.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that any interested party or Intervenor wishing to submit a
response in further support of, or opposition to, Defendant’s pending motion may do so on or
before February 16, 2021. The parties may also address jurisdictional or other concerns bearing
on the Intervenors’ request for leave to petition the undersigned for approval of a charging lien.

______________________________
SUSAN PARADISE BAXTER
United States District Judge

2