Russo v. Costco Wholesale Corporation

Background

Andrea Russo sued Costco Wholesale Corporation, alleging that she suffered personal injuries after falling inside Costco’s store. Francis X. Young had represented Russo since the case was removed to federal court in April 2022. The court had denied Costco’s motion for summary judgment on February 13, 2025, referred the case to settlement discussions, and set a tentative trial date from September 29 through October 2, 2025.

Young later asked to withdraw, citing irreconcilable differences, disagreements about tactics and strategy, and a material breakdown in the attorney-client relationship. Russo opposed the motion, and Costco opposed it based on the possible effect on the trial schedule.

Withdrawal of Counsel

Under Local Civil Rule 1.4, a lawyer who has appeared for a party may withdraw only by court order and must show satisfactory reasons for withdrawal while addressing the posture of the case and any retaining or charging lien. A retaining lien generally concerns a lawyer’s right to retain client property, while a charging lien concerns a potential claim against money recovered in the case.

The court found that Young had shown satisfactory reasons. It relied on his affidavit, filings, and communications showing a contentious relationship and a breakdown in trust between Young and Russo. The court also considered the effect on the case’s timing. Because Young raised the issue months before the scheduled trial and Costco had not shown actual prejudice from a delay, the court concluded that withdrawal would not disrupt the proceedings enough to require denial.

The court therefore granted Young’s motion to withdraw, subject to his supplementing his briefing with an affidavit confirming whether he asserted a charging or retaining lien.

Sealing and Scheduling

The court granted Russo’s motions to seal. It allowed filings supporting the withdrawal motion and related affidavits to remain ex parte and under seal to protect the confidentiality of the attorney-client relationship. The court directed the Clerk to maintain the existing viewing levels for the specified sealed filings.

The court adjourned the trial date and stated that a new date would be provided after further discussions. It directed the parties to promptly reschedule their settlement conference with Judge Berg. Russo was directed to contact the City Bar Justice Center by August 8, 2025, for assistance with settlement and possible limited-scope representation. The court stated that it would issue a separate scheduling order addressing this order and the next steps in the case.

Ruling

Judge Victoria Reznik granted the motion for counsel to withdraw, subject to the required lien affidavit; granted Russo’s motions to seal; adjourned the trial date; and issued related settlement and scheduling directions. The order did not decide the underlying personal-injury claims.