1 2 3
4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10
11 MATTHEW PETERSON, et al., Case No. 1:22-cv-00701-JLT-CDB
12 Plaintiffs, ORDER GRANTING ATTORNEY LINDSAY LIEN AMIN’S MOTION TO WITHDRAW AS 13 v. FOR PLAINTIFF
14 THOMSON INTERNATIONAL, INC., (Doc. 60)
15 Defendant. 16 17
18 This matter is before the Court on the motion of Lindsay Lien Amin on behalf of herself and
19 Eric Gruber (local counsel) to withdraw as counsel of record for Plaintiff Carson Brenda, initially filed 20 January 23, 2024, and supplemented on January 25, 2024. (Docs. 58, 60). The Court convened for an 21 in-person and Zoom videoconference hearing on the motion on March 4, 2024. Counsel Amin and 22 counsel for Defendant appeared via Zoom videoconference; Plaintiff Brenda did not appear. For the 23 reasons set forth below, counsel Amin’s motion to withdraw will be granted. 24 Background 25 Plaintiff Carson Brenda is one of eight Plaintiffs who raise claims against Defendant Thomson 26 International Inc., in a complaint filed on June 10, 2022. (Doc. 1). Brenda’s claims stem from alleged 27 illness he suffered after consuming onions sourced by Defendant in or around July 1, 2022. Id. ⁋⁋49- 28 56. 1 Legal Standard 2 The decision to grant or deny an attorney’s motion to withdraw is ultimately committed to the 3 discretion of the trial court. United States v. Carter, 560 F.3d 1107, 1113 (9th Cir. 2009). “In ruling 4 on a motion to withdraw as counsel, courts consider (1) the reasons why withdrawal is sought; (2) the 5 prejudice withdrawal may cause to other litigants; (3) the harm withdrawal might cause to the 6 administration of justice; and (4) the degree to which withdrawal will delay the resolution of the case.” 7 Beard v. Shuttermart of Cal., Inc., No. 3:07-cv-00594-WQH-NLS, 2008 WL 410694, at *2 (S.D. Cal. 8 Feb. 13, 2008) (citing Nat’l Career Coll., Inc. v. Spellings, No. 07-cv-00075-HG-LK, 2007 WL 9 2048776, at *2 (D. Haw. July 11, 2007)); see CE Res., Inc. v. Magellan Grp., LLC, No. 2:08-cv- 10 02999-MCE-KJM, 2009 WL 3367489, at *2 (E.D. Cal. Oct. 14, 2009) (noting that “[u]ltimately, the 11 court’s ruling must involve a balancing of the equities”). 12 In addition to the above factors, withdrawal of counsel is governed by the Local Rules. Local 13 Rule 182(d) provides that if withdrawal would leave a client without counsel, an attorney must file a 14 formal motion and provide the client and all other parties with notice of the motion to withdraw. Id. 15 The attorney must also submit an affidavit providing the current or last known address of the client 16 and describing the efforts made to notify the client of the motion to withdraw. Id. 17 Further, “[w]ithdrawal as attorney is governed by the Rules of Professional Conduct of the 18 State Bar of California, and the attorney shall conform to the requirements of those Rules.” Id. The 19 California Rules of Professional Conduct provide that if the rules of a court require permission for an 20 attorney to withdraw, the attorney may not withdraw from employment in a proceeding without the 21 permission of such court. Cal. R. Prof. Conduct 1.16(c). Also, counsel must take reasonable steps to 22 avoid prejudicing the rights of the client, including providing notice, allowing time for the client to 23 employ other counsel, and complying with applicable laws and rules. Cal. R. Prof. Conduct 1.6(d). 24 Grounds for permissive withdrawal exist when “the client by other conduct renders it unreasonably 25 difficult for the lawyer to carry out the representation effectively.” Cal. R. Prof. Conduct 1.6(b)(4). 26 / / / 27 / / / 28 1 Discussion 2 Counsel Amin attests that Plaintiff Brenda has failed to communicate with her about his 3 pending claims. According to counsel Amin, Plaintiff Brenda’s conduct has rendered it impossible for 4 counsel to respond to reasonable discovery requests or otherwise comply with his discovery 5 obligations. (Doc. 60 p. 2). Counsel Amin further attests that Plaintiff Brenda has not responded to 6 her communications since June 2023. Counsel attempted to contact Plaintiff Brenda by phone, text 7 message, email, and mail, without a response. Counsel specifically attests that she attempted to contact 8 Plaintiff Brenda on September 13, October 10, October 27, and November 20, 2023, through either 9 text messages or emails. (Doc. 60-1 p. 2). Counsel confirmed during the motion hearing that, up until 10 June 2023, she had successfully communicated with Plaintiff Brenda using all three of those 11 communication mediums (phone, text message, and email). 12 On January 5, 2024, counsel Amin contacted Plaintiff Brenda by email, mail, and text message 13 informing him that she intended to discontinue representation unless he responded. Id. ⁋8. She also 14 attempted to call Plaintiff Brenda on January 16, 2024, but he did not answer, and his voicemail was 15 full. During the motion hearing, counsel Amin represented that the voicemail message identified 16 Plaintiff Brenda. Counsel also attempted to contact Plaintiff Brenda by text message. Counsel Lien 17 Amin attempted to contact Plaintiff Brenda through calling or texting him her intention to withdraw 18 but received no answer. Id. ⁋9. 19 Finally, on January 22, 2024, counsel Amin sent Plaintiff Brenda a letter through U.S. postal 20 mail as well as an email explaining her notice of motion to withdraw as counsel and informing him of 21 the consequences of such a motion. Id. ⁋10. She sent another notice following the Court’s denial of 22 her initial motion to withdraw. Id. ⁋12. During the motion hearing, counsel Amin confirmed that none 23 of the correspondence she has transmitted to Plaintiff Brenda via U.S. postal mail has been returned 24 “undeliverable.” 25 The Court finds counsel Amin has provided good cause to withdraw under the California Rules 26 of Professional Conduct as it appears a breakdown in the attorney-client relationship has occurred 27 despite counsel Amin’s attempts to engage with Plaintiff Brenda over an extended period of time 28 (between June 2023 and the present). Further, counsel Amin has complied with the notice 1 requirements in Local Rule 182(d). The Court also notes granting withdrawal will not cause any 2 prejudice to any litigant, to the administration of justice, or delay the resolution of the case. Among 3 other things, the Court notes that Defendant has not opposed the pending motion, or otherwise asserted 4 that it will suffer any prejudice from the Court’s granting of the pending motion. 5 Because Plaintiff Brenda has not filed a substitution of attorney, the Court will direct him to 6 inform the Court in writing within fourteen (14) days of the service of this order whether he intends to 7 continue prosecuting this action and, if so, whether he intends to obtain substitute counsel or proceed 8 pro se. Any failure by Plaintiff to respond to the Court’s order in this regard will result in the 9 dismissal of this action for failure to prosecute and failure to comply with the Court’s order. 10 Conclusion 11 For the reasons set forth above: 12 1. Lindsay Lien Amin’s motion to withdraw as counsel (Doc. 60) is GRANTED; 13 2. The Clerk of the Court is directed to terminate Lindsay Lien Amin and Eric R. 14 Gruber as the counsel of record for Plaintiff Carson Brenda. 15 3. Counsel Lien Amin shall comply with all obligations under Rule 1.16(e) of the 16 California Rules of Professional Conduct regarding the release of a client’s papers 17 and property and the return of unearned fees; and 18 4. Plaintiff is substituted in pro se and is directed to comply with all hearing dates and 19 the rules of the Court; 20 5. The Clerk of the Court is directed to enter the following contact information as 21 Plaintiff’s address of record: 22 Carson W. Brenda 23 19448 Brookside Way 24 Bend, OR 97702 25 6.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
1 2 3
4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10
11 MATTHEW PETERSON, et al., Case No. 1:22-cv-00701-JLT-CDB
12 Plaintiffs, ORDER GRANTING ATTORNEY LINDSAY LIEN AMIN’S MOTION TO WITHDRAW AS 13 v. FOR PLAINTIFF
14 THOMSON INTERNATIONAL, INC., (Doc. 60)
15 Defendant. 16 17
18 This matter is before the Court on the motion of Lindsay Lien Amin on behalf of herself and
19 Eric Gruber (local counsel) to withdraw as counsel of record for Plaintiff Carson Brenda, initially filed 20 January 23, 2024, and supplemented on January 25, 2024. (Docs. 58, 60). The Court convened for an 21 in-person and Zoom videoconference hearing on the motion on March 4, 2024. Counsel Amin and 22 counsel for Defendant appeared via Zoom videoconference; Plaintiff Brenda did not appear. For the 23 reasons set forth below, counsel Amin’s motion to withdraw will be granted. 24 Background 25 Plaintiff Carson Brenda is one of eight Plaintiffs who raise claims against Defendant Thomson 26 International Inc., in a complaint filed on June 10, 2022. (Doc. 1). Brenda’s claims stem from alleged 27 illness he suffered after consuming onions sourced by Defendant in or around July 1, 2022. Id. ⁋⁋49- 28 56. 1 Legal Standard 2 The decision to grant or deny an attorney’s motion to withdraw is ultimately committed to the 3 discretion of the trial court. United States v. Carter, 560 F.3d 1107, 1113 (9th Cir. 2009). “In ruling 4 on a motion to withdraw as counsel, courts consider (1) the reasons why withdrawal is sought; (2) the 5 prejudice withdrawal may cause to other litigants; (3) the harm withdrawal might cause to the 6 administration of justice; and (4) the degree to which withdrawal will delay the resolution of the case.” 7 Beard v. Shuttermart of Cal., Inc., No. 3:07-cv-00594-WQH-NLS, 2008 WL 410694, at *2 (S.D. Cal. 8 Feb. 13, 2008) (citing Nat’l Career Coll., Inc. v. Spellings, No. 07-cv-00075-HG-LK, 2007 WL 9 2048776, at *2 (D. Haw. July 11, 2007)); see CE Res., Inc. v. Magellan Grp., LLC, No. 2:08-cv- 10 02999-MCE-KJM, 2009 WL 3367489, at *2 (E.D. Cal. Oct. 14, 2009) (noting that “[u]ltimately, the 11 court’s ruling must involve a balancing of the equities”). 12 In addition to the above factors, withdrawal of counsel is governed by the Local Rules. Local 13 Rule 182(d) provides that if withdrawal would leave a client without counsel, an attorney must file a 14 formal motion and provide the client and all other parties with notice of the motion to withdraw. Id. 15 The attorney must also submit an affidavit providing the current or last known address of the client 16 and describing the efforts made to notify the client of the motion to withdraw. Id. 17 Further, “[w]ithdrawal as attorney is governed by the Rules of Professional Conduct of the 18 State Bar of California, and the attorney shall conform to the requirements of those Rules.” Id. The 19 California Rules of Professional Conduct provide that if the rules of a court require permission for an 20 attorney to withdraw, the attorney may not withdraw from employment in a proceeding without the 21 permission of such court. Cal. R. Prof. Conduct 1.16(c). Also, counsel must take reasonable steps to 22 avoid prejudicing the rights of the client, including providing notice, allowing time for the client to 23 employ other counsel, and complying with applicable laws and rules. Cal. R. Prof. Conduct 1.6(d). 24 Grounds for permissive withdrawal exist when “the client by other conduct renders it unreasonably 25 difficult for the lawyer to carry out the representation effectively.” Cal. R. Prof. Conduct 1.6(b)(4). 26 / / / 27 / / / 28 1 Discussion 2 Counsel Amin attests that Plaintiff Brenda has failed to communicate with her about his 3 pending claims. According to counsel Amin, Plaintiff Brenda’s conduct has rendered it impossible for 4 counsel to respond to reasonable discovery requests or otherwise comply with his discovery 5 obligations. (Doc. 60 p. 2). Counsel Amin further attests that Plaintiff Brenda has not responded to 6 her communications since June 2023. Counsel attempted to contact Plaintiff Brenda by phone, text 7 message, email, and mail, without a response. Counsel specifically attests that she attempted to contact 8 Plaintiff Brenda on September 13, October 10, October 27, and November 20, 2023, through either 9 text messages or emails. (Doc. 60-1 p. 2). Counsel confirmed during the motion hearing that, up until 10 June 2023, she had successfully communicated with Plaintiff Brenda using all three of those 11 communication mediums (phone, text message, and email). 12 On January 5, 2024, counsel Amin contacted Plaintiff Brenda by email, mail, and text message 13 informing him that she intended to discontinue representation unless he responded. Id. ⁋8. She also 14 attempted to call Plaintiff Brenda on January 16, 2024, but he did not answer, and his voicemail was 15 full. During the motion hearing, counsel Amin represented that the voicemail message identified 16 Plaintiff Brenda. Counsel also attempted to contact Plaintiff Brenda by text message. Counsel Lien 17 Amin attempted to contact Plaintiff Brenda through calling or texting him her intention to withdraw 18 but received no answer. Id. ⁋9. 19 Finally, on January 22, 2024, counsel Amin sent Plaintiff Brenda a letter through U.S. postal 20 mail as well as an email explaining her notice of motion to withdraw as counsel and informing him of 21 the consequences of such a motion. Id. ⁋10. She sent another notice following the Court’s denial of 22 her initial motion to withdraw. Id. ⁋12. During the motion hearing, counsel Amin confirmed that none 23 of the correspondence she has transmitted to Plaintiff Brenda via U.S. postal mail has been returned 24 “undeliverable.” 25 The Court finds counsel Amin has provided good cause to withdraw under the California Rules 26 of Professional Conduct as it appears a breakdown in the attorney-client relationship has occurred 27 despite counsel Amin’s attempts to engage with Plaintiff Brenda over an extended period of time 28 (between June 2023 and the present). Further, counsel Amin has complied with the notice 1 requirements in Local Rule 182(d). The Court also notes granting withdrawal will not cause any 2 prejudice to any litigant, to the administration of justice, or delay the resolution of the case. Among 3 other things, the Court notes that Defendant has not opposed the pending motion, or otherwise asserted 4 that it will suffer any prejudice from the Court’s granting of the pending motion. 5 Because Plaintiff Brenda has not filed a substitution of attorney, the Court will direct him to 6 inform the Court in writing within fourteen (14) days of the service of this order whether he intends to 7 continue prosecuting this action and, if so, whether he intends to obtain substitute counsel or proceed 8 pro se. Any failure by Plaintiff to respond to the Court’s order in this regard will result in the 9 dismissal of this action for failure to prosecute and failure to comply with the Court’s order. 10 Conclusion 11 For the reasons set forth above: 12 1. Lindsay Lien Amin’s motion to withdraw as counsel (Doc. 60) is GRANTED; 13 2. The Clerk of the Court is directed to terminate Lindsay Lien Amin and Eric R. 14 Gruber as the counsel of record for Plaintiff Carson Brenda. 15 3. Counsel Lien Amin shall comply with all obligations under Rule 1.16(e) of the 16 California Rules of Professional Conduct regarding the release of a client’s papers 17 and property and the return of unearned fees; and 18 4. Plaintiff is substituted in pro se and is directed to comply with all hearing dates and 19 the rules of the Court; 20 5. The Clerk of the Court is directed to enter the following contact information as 21 Plaintiff’s address of record: 22 Carson W. Brenda 23 19448 Brookside Way 24 Bend, OR 97702 25 6. The Clerk of the Court is directed to serve this order on Plaintiff Brenda by mail; 26 7. Plaintiff Brenda is directed to inform the court within fourteen (14) days of service 27 of this order whether he intends to continue prosecuting this action and, if so, 28 ! whether he intends to obtain new counsel or represent himself. Any failure by Plaintiff to respond to the court’s order in this regard will result in the dismissal of ; this action for failure to prosecute and failure to comply with the court’s order. IT IS SO ORDERED. 6|| Dated: _ March 8, 2024 | wan D Rr ; UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28