IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN JOSE DIVISION
March 18, 2011
APOLONIA SALINAS, ET AL.,
LAVENDER INVESTMENT, INC., ET AL., DEFENDANTS.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Howard R. Lloyd United States Magistrate Judge
** E-filed March 18, 2011 **
NOT FOR CITATION
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT'S COUNSEL'S MOTION TO 13 WITHDRAW [Re: Docket No. 25]
Apolonia Salinas and Faustino Cortez ("Plaintiffs") brought this wage-and-hour action 17 against their former employer Lavender Investment, Inc. d/b/a/ Ma's Restaurant ("Lavender") and 18 Tohn Shieh ("Shieh"). In November 2010, Plaintiffs executed separate settlement agreements with 19 Lavender.*fn1 Thereafter, Lavender notified its counsel, Hopkins & Carley, that it does not wish to 20 continue to be represented by them anymore. Docket No. 25-1 ("Pyne Decl.") ¶4. Accordingly, 21 Hopkins & Carley now moves to withdraw from this case. Docket No. 25 ("Motion").*fn2
Under this District's civil local rules, "[c]counsel may not withdraw from an action until 23 relieved by order of Court after written notice has been given reasonably in advance to the client and 24 to all other parties who have appeared in the case." Civ. L. R. 11-5(a). Moreover, "[w]hen 25 withdrawal by an attorney from an action is not accompanied by simultaneous appearance of 2 substitute counsel or agreement of the party to appear pro se, leave to withdraw may be subject to 3 the condition that papers may continue to be served on counsel for forwarding purposes . . . , unless 4 and until the client appears by other counsel or pro se. When this condition is imposed, counsel 5 must notify the party of this condition. Any filed consent by the party to counsel's withdrawal under 6 these circumstances must include acknowledgment of this condition." Civ. L. R. 11-5(b). In 7 addition, "[a] corporation, unincorporated association, partnership or other such entity may appear 8 only through a member of the bar of this Court." Civ. L. R. 3-9(b). 9
Since Lavender is a corporation, it may only appear in this action through an attorney; it may 10 not appear pro se. In his declaration, Lavender's counsel states that he has "explained the potential consequences of [Hopkins & Carley's] withdrawal to [Lavender], and [Lavender] has confirmed its desire for no further representation by Hopkins & Carley." Pyne Decl. ¶ 4. 13
Since Lavender has told Hopkins & Carley that it does not wish to continue to be 14 represented by them, good cause exists to allow them to withdraw. Accordingly, Hopkins & 15 Carley's motion is GRANTED.*fn3 However, since Lavender's counsel makes no mention of the 16 simultaneous appearance of substitute counsel and Lavender may not appear pro se, the withdrawal 17 is subject to the condition that papers may continue to be served on Hopkins & Carley for 18 forwarding purposes unless and until Lavender appears by other counsel. Hopkins & Carley shall 19 notify Lavender of this condition. 20 21
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Notice will be electronically mailed to:
Adam Wang firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org Adam Lee Pedersen email@example.com Daniel Francis Pyne, III firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com 4 Counsel are responsible for distributing copies of this document to co-counsel who have not registered for e-filing under the court's CM/ECF program.