Mogan v. Sacks, Ricketts & Case LLP

Background

Michael Mogan consented to have a United States magistrate judge conduct all further proceedings in the civil case, including trial and entry of final judgment, under 28 U.S.C. § 636(c). He later filed a request for reassignment, seeking to withdraw that consent.

Legal standard

The court explained that a party generally has a constitutional right to proceed before an Article III judge, but may waive that right by consenting to proceedings before a magistrate judge. After a case is referred to a magistrate judge under § 636(c), the consent may be withdrawn only by the court, and only for good cause or extraordinary circumstances. Courts also consider the timing of the request, possible delay or interference with the proceedings, burdens and costs to the parties, and whether the original consent was voluntary and uncoerced.

Ruling

The court found that Mogan had not shown good cause or extraordinary circumstances. It also noted that judgment had already been entered, that the only pending matters were the defendants’ attorney-fee motions, and that allowing withdrawal at that stage would delay the proceedings. The court therefore disregarded the withdrawal of consent and ordered that no reassignment occur. The order did not rule on the attorney-fee motions.