ORDER STRIKING NOVEMBER 28,
2011 APPLICATION BY ATTORNEY
(Document # 776)
This action was set for trial on September 20, 2011. When Plaintiffs did not file a pretrial statement, on August 11, 2011, the court vacated the trial date and ordered Plaintiffs to show cause why this case should not be dismissed for their failure to file a pretrial statement.
On August 11, 2011, Attorney Michael L. Abbott ("Attorney Abbott"), on behalf of Plaintiffs, filed an application requesting that the court find certain prior orders final for the purposes of appeal.
After requesting an extension of time, on September 30, 2011, Plaintiffs filed a response to the court's order to show cause. As to Attorney Abbott, Plaintiffs stated, in part, the following:
1. Plaintiffs Terry D. Hamilton and Sharon M. Hamilton, hereinafter referred to as ("Plaintiffs") respectfully request permission to appear pro se and file Plaintiffs' joint Response to this Court's Order to Show Cause entered as docket number 769.
2. Plaintiffs' reserve their rights to supplement Plaintiffs'
Response to this
Court's Order to Show Cause due to the complex nature of issues
pending in the instant case after new counsel is retained and has
e-filed his/her entry of appearance pursuant to the local rules. . . ..
3. Plaintiffs respectfully request that the Court enter an Order: a) directing Mr. Abbott to prepare a "Substitution of Counsel" for Plaintiffs to execute and further direct his Office to e-file same on PACER e-filing system; b) the Order should clarify that Mr. Abbott is no longer counsel of record for Plaintiffs in the instant case; and c) that any new counsel for Plaintiffs will be treated fairly as any officer of the court.
4. The purpose of this Order is to satisfy Plaintiffs new perspective counsel who will first review the status of the case on PACER regarding any potential threats of sanctions and other problems regarding Mr. Abbott as Plaintiffs' former counsel.
5. Plaintiffs have been unsuccessful to date to hire new counsel to substitute in as replacement counsel for Mr. Abbott. . . .
October 28, 2011, the court discharged the order to show cause. On the issue of Attorney Abbott's representation and the next procedural step to be taken in this action, the court ruled as follows:
Finally, Plaintiffs request that the court enter an order requiring Attorney Abbott to withdraw from this action. The court has reviewed the docket and agrees with Plaintiffs that whether Attorney Abbott is Plaintiffs' counsel of record is unclear. The court's proof of service and list of attorneys representing Plaintiffs indicate Attorney Abbott is no longer Plaintiffs' attorney and Plaintiffs are appearing pro se. The court will issue an order confirming this.
Accordingly, the court ORDERS that:
1. The court's August 11, 2011 order to show case ...