Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
Back to docket
N.D. Cal.Procedural orderFiled Mar. 17, 2025

Millennium Franchise Group, LLC v. Bank of America, N.A.

Judge
Charles Breyer
Docket
3:21-cv-08684
Court
U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
Pages
2
Civil Procedure
In one sentence

In Millennium Franchise Group v. Bank of America, Judge Breyer granted counsel’s withdrawal motion, requiring the company to substitute counsel within 30 days.

Who this affects

Millennium Franchise Group, LLC and its attorneys. The withdrawing law firm was permitted to leave the case, and Millennium must obtain substitute counsel to continue litigating.

What happened

In Millennium Franchise Group, LLC v. Bank of America, N.A., attorney Jeffery Hubins asked to withdraw as counsel for Millennium Franchise Group, LLC. He cited the company’s consent, his physical and mental health after a cancer diagnosis, and a breakdown in the attorney-client relationship.

The court found that all three reasons supported withdrawal. It also found no likely prejudice or delay because the parties consented, the law firm had provided the company’s electronic case file and would provide access to its physical file, and discovery was nearly complete except for the company’s deposition.

Judge Charles R. Breyer granted the motion to withdraw. Because a limited liability company cannot represent itself without a lawyer, the court ordered Millennium to file a substitution of counsel within 30 days. Until then, court papers must be served on the withdrawing law firm and forwarded to Millennium; failure to substitute counsel may result in dismissal for failure to prosecute.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Millennium Franchise Group, LLC v. Bank of America, N.A. · No. 3:21-cv-08684
Judge
Charles Breyer
Date
Mar. 17, 2025

Background

Jeffery Hubins of Schauman & Hubins moved to withdraw as counsel for Plaintiff Millennium Franchise Group, LLC. He identified three grounds: Millennium’s consent, his physical and mental health after a cancer diagnosis, and a breakdown in the attorney-client relationship.

The court stated that each reason is a valid basis for withdrawal under the California Rules of Professional Conduct, although none automatically requires the court to permit withdrawal. The court also considered whether withdrawal would prejudice the parties or delay the case.

Court’s analysis

The court found no apparent prejudice. Millennium and the defendants, through counsel, had consented to the withdrawal. Schauman & Hubins had provided Millennium with its electronic case file and would provide access to its physical case file. The court also found no likely delay because discovery was nearly complete, with only Millennium’s deposition remaining.

Ruling and conditions

The court granted Schauman & Hubins’s motion to withdraw as counsel. It ordered Millennium, a limited liability company, to file a substitution of counsel within 30 days because the company may not appear without a lawyer. The court warned that failure to do so may result in dismissal of the action for failure to prosecute.

Until Millennium files a substitution of counsel, any papers filed in the case must be served on Schauman & Hubins and forwarded to Millennium. The order was signed by Judge Charles R. Breyer on March 17, 2025.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.