Gor v. British Airways, PLC
- Edward Chen
- 3:21-cv-01840
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 2
In Gor v. British Airways, Judge Chen granted Anita Gor’s request for her attorney to withdraw because their relationship had broken down.
Anita Gor and her attorney, P. David Cienfuegos, are directly affected. Cienfuegos may withdraw, and future filings must be served directly on Gor. The order does not decide the underlying dispute with British Airways, PLC.
What happened
In Gor v. British Airways, Anita Gor’s attorney, P. David Cienfuegos, asked to withdraw from representing her. The court considered Gor’s written opposition and both parties’ statements at a hearing.
The court found a significant breakdown in the attorney-client relationship that made it unreasonably difficult to continue the representation effectively.
Judge Chen granted Gor’s request for Cienfuegos to withdraw. Cienfuegos must serve the order on Gor and file proof of service, and future filings must be served directly on Gor.
The detailed version
- Gor v. British Airways, PLC · No. 3:21-cv-01840
- Edward Chen
- Mar. 16, 2023
Background
Anita Gor was represented by attorney P. David Cienfuegos. The attorney-client relationship became “untenable and irreparable.” Cienfuegos sought permission to withdraw from the representation, and Gor submitted a written opposition.
Court’s analysis
The court considered Gor’s written opposition and the representations made by Gor and Cienfuegos at an ex parte hearing. Applying California’s professional-conduct rule allowing withdrawal when a client’s conduct makes it unreasonably difficult for the attorney to carry out the representation effectively, the court found a significant breakdown in the attorney-client relationship.
Ruling and effect
The court granted Gor’s request for Cienfuegos to withdraw as her counsel. Cienfuegos was directed to serve the order on Gor and file proof of service shortly afterward. From that point forward, all filings must be served directly on Gor. The order disposed of Docket No. 63.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.