June 14, 2013
ACACIA CORPORATE MANAGEMENT, LLC, MICHAEL IOANE, Plaintiffs,
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, et al., Defendants. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff,
VINCENT STEVEN BOOTH, et al., Defendants. STEVEN BOOTH, et al., Plaintiffs,
ACACIA CORPORATE MANAGEMENT, LLC., et al., Defendants. AND RELATED COUNTERCLAIMS
ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION
ANTHONY ISHII, District Judge.
In these three cases, the court denied Attorney McPike's request to withdraw as attorney for Mr. Ioane. The Ioane Group now seeks reconsideration. Specifically, Mr. McPike states "Yesterday, after the hearing and the court's order that Mr. Ioane, Sr., would not be allowed to proceed proper and that I would be counsel for him and for Acacia Corporate Management, LLC., I was approached by one of the owners of Acacia Corporate Management LLC and was questioned about a conflict between the parties. After due consideration, I have determined that a conflict does exist. I did not discuss this yesterday; because it had not occurred to me; until one of the owners of Acacia Corporate Management LLC questioned me about this, Michael S. Ioane, Jr., who was present in the court room." Case No. 09-1689, Doc. 158, 2:1-10. Similarly, Mr. Ioane states "After the hearing on June 10, 2013, I spoke with family and realized that Acacia Corporate Management, LLC and I have a conflict. This conflict was expressed to Attorney William McPike after the hearing by one of the owners of Acacia Corporate Management LLC." Case No. 09-1689, Doc. 160, 1:25-2:1. Neither Mr. Ioane nor Mr. McPike provide any detail or proof as to the nature of the alleged conflict between Mr. Ioane and Acacia. California Rule of Professional Conduct 3-310(C) states that "A member shall not, without the informed written consent of each client:.... (2) Accept or continue representation of more than one client in a matter in which the interests of the clients actually conflict." Based on the Ioane Group's filings, the court can not determine that Mr. McPike's simultaneous representation of Mr. Ioane and Acacia constitutes an actual conflict. Thus, the motion for reconsideration is DENIED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.