Gonzalez v. Ahern

Background

Yolanda Huang, Richard Brody, and Thomas Nanney moved for permission to withdraw as counsel for plaintiff Darryl Geyer. Counsel stated that an irretrievable breakdown in communication had produced a fundamental disagreement about how to prosecute the case. Geyer filed materials alleging misconduct but did not explicitly respond to the withdrawal request.

Court’s analysis

The Northern District of California’s local rules require court approval before counsel may withdraw. The court also considered the reasons for withdrawal, possible prejudice to the litigants, effects on the administration of justice, potential delay, and applicable California professional-conduct rules. Those rules permit withdrawal when a client makes representation unreasonably difficult, subject to reasonable steps to avoid foreseeable prejudice to the client.

The court found good cause because Geyer’s communications showed a fundamental breakdown between him and counsel. Although Geyer did not expressly discharge counsel, his misconduct allegations made it no longer possible for counsel to represent him effectively. The court stated that it did not need to resolve those allegations.

Order

Judge Jacquelyn Corley granted counsel’s motion to withdraw as counsel for Geyer. Because the motion was not accompanied by replacement counsel or Geyer’s agreement to represent himself, counsel must continue to receive papers for forwarding until Geyer appears through other counsel or represents himself. Counsel must notify Geyer of the order and this continuing obligation and file proof of service within three days. The order disposed of Docket No. 517.