Puckett v. Chester County Sheriff's Office
Filing
19
ORDER granting 16 MOTION to Withdraw as Attorney filed by Shannon D Puckett. Attorney Janet Elizabeth Rhodes terminated. Signed by Magistrate Judge Shiva V Hodges on 1/4/2016. (mwal)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA
ROCK HILL DIVISION
Shannon D. Puckett,
Plaintiff,
vs.
Chester County Sheriff’s Office,
Defendant.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
C/A No.: 0:15-cv-1392-JMC-SVH
ORDER
This matter comes before the court on the motion of Janet E. Rhodes, Esq., of
Callison Tighe & Robinson, LLC, to be relieved as counsel for Shannon D. Puckett
(“Plaintiff”). [ECF No. 16]. Ms. Rhodes indicates that she and her staff have tried
unsuccessfully on many occasions to contact Plaintiff via email, U.S. mail, and
telephone, to participate in responding to discovery requests. Despite being informed by
Ms. Rhodes by letter dated November 18, 2015, that if Plaintiff did not contact her office,
Ms. Rhodes would be forced to file to be relieved as her counsel, Plaintiff failed to
contact her. Id. Ms. Rhodes provided a copy of the motion to withdraw as counsel, filed
on December 10, 2015, to Plaintiff. Id. In accordance with Local Civ. Rule 83.I.07(B),
the motion also informs Plaintiff that she may file an objection to the motion within 17
days. Id. That time period has now passed, and Plaintiff did not file an objection to the
motion. Therefore, the court grants Ms. Rhodes’s motion to withdraw.
The court directs Plaintiff to notify the court by February 3, 2016, of the identity
of the new attorney(s) she has retained to represent her in this case or, alternatively, of
her desire to proceed with this litigation pro se, i.e., without an attorney. If Plaintiff does
not wish to continue this lawsuit, she may request that the court dismiss the case in its
entirety. To this end, Plaintiff shall, by February 3, 2016, complete the attached notice
and mail it to the Clerk of Court at the address indicated. If Plaintiff fails to file the
attached letter with the Clerk within the time prescribed, the court will consider her as
proceeding pro se.
Plaintiff is specifically advised that, if no new attorney is obtained to represent her
interests, the court will expect this litigation to be conducted in accordance with all
provisions of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and that the court is unable to provide
her with legal advice.
Failure to comply with court rules could have serious
consequences including, but not limited to, striking her claims and dismissing the case
against the Chester County Sheriff’s Office.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
January 4, 2016
Columbia, South Carolina
Shiva V. Hodges
United States Magistrate Judge
2
Name: __________________________
Address___________________________
___________________________
Clerk of Court
United States District Court
901 Richland Street
Columbia, South Carolina 29201
In Re: 0:15-cv-01392-JMC-SVH Puckett v. Chester County Sheriff's Office
Dear Ms. Blume:
In response to the order of Judge Hodges dated January 4, 2016, I wish to advise
as follows:
_____ 1.
I, ________________ (Printed Name), have obtained a new attorney
to personally represent me in this matter. His [or her] name, address,
and telephone number are as follows:
__________________________________________
__________________________________________
OR
_____ 2.
I, ________________ (Printed Name), have NOT obtained a new
attorney and will represent myself in this matter. I request that the
Clerk of Court direct all notices and pleadings to me at the above
address. I understand that I am obligated to comply with all
provisions of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and to keep the
Clerk of Court informed as to my proper address.
_____ 3.
I, ________________ (Printed Name), do not wish to continue this
lawsuit and request that the court dismiss the case in its entirety.
_____________________________________ ______________
Signature
Date
3
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?