Perez v. Worldwide Flight Services, Inc.

• Court: District Court, S.D. California
• Decided: January 7, 2020
• Docket: 3:19-cv-01626
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 ERIKA PEREZ, Case No.: 19-CV-1626 W (KSC)

12 Plaintiff, ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO 13 v. WITHDRAW AS COUNSEL [DOC. 14] 14 WORLDWIDE FLIGHT SERVICES, INC., et al., 15 Defendants. 16

17 Attorneys Stephen Mitchell and Heng G. Shi have filed a motion to withdraw as 18 attorneys of record for Plaintiff Erika Perez. [Doc. 14.] Defendants do not oppose. 19 [Doc. 15.] 20 “The grant or denial of an attorney’s motion to withdraw in a civil case is a matter 21 addressed to the discretion of the trial court . . . .” Washington v. Sherwin Real Estate, 22 Inc., 694 F.2d 1081, 1087 (7th Cir. 1982). Factors considered in evaluating the 23 application include: “1) the reasons why withdrawal is sought; 2) the prejudice 24 withdrawal may cause to other litigants; 3) the harm withdrawal might cause to the 25 administration of justice; and 4) the degree to which withdrawal will delay the resolution 26 of the case.” CE Resource, Inc. v Magellan Group, LLC, 2009 WL 3367489, at *2 (E.D. 27 28 1 || Cal. Oct. 14, 2009) (citing Canandaigua Wine Co., Inc. v. Moldauer, 2009 WL 89141, at 2 || *1 (E.D. Cal. Jan. 14, 2009)). 3 Plaintiff has consented to the withdrawal and been informed that Plaintiff will be 4 || acting pro se moving forward unless new counsel is obtained. (Mot. to Withdraw [Doc. 5 || 14] 2:5-8.) As noted, other litigants in this case have not opposed the application to 6 || withdraw. Good cause appearing, the Court GRANTS the withdrawal and ORDERS 7 || that the docket reflect Attorney Shi’s and Attorney Mitchell’s withdrawal from the case. 8 9 IT IS SO ORDERED. 10 Dated: January 6, 2020 \ [pe Dor 12 Hn. 1 omas J. Whelan 13 Unted States District Judge 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28