Modragon v. Mike Mini Mart and Deli Corp.

Background

Enrique A. Leal, counsel for defendants Make Mini Mart and Deli Corp. and Nabil K. Himed, moved to withdraw from the case. He stated that withdrawal was necessary because the defendants had failed to cooperate in prosecuting their case and had failed to pay legal fees. He also represented that he had not heard from the defendants since June 24, 2020.

Court’s analysis

The court applied the two factors used for motions by attorneys seeking permission to withdraw: the reasons for withdrawal and the effect withdrawal would have on the timing of the proceeding. The court found compelling reasons because a client’s failure to cooperate and failure to pay legal fees are satisfactory grounds for withdrawal. It also determined that withdrawal would not cause meaningful delay. The defendants’ nonparticipation had apparently delayed the filing of an answer, and the plaintiff intended to seek a default judgment.

Ruling and orders

The court granted Leal’s motion to withdraw as counsel. It ordered Leal to serve the order on the defendants personally by August 24, 2020, and to file proof of service by August 28, 2020.

The court stated that Nabil Himed could retain a new attorney or proceed on his own behalf. It required Himed to tell the court by September 14, 2020 whether he had retained new counsel or would proceed without a lawyer. If he chose to proceed without a lawyer, he also had to provide the Southern District of New York’s Pro Se Office with his address and telephone number by that date.

The court explained that Make Mini Mart and Deli Corporation could continue defending itself only through a lawyer, so it had to report by September 14, 2020 whether it had retained new counsel. The clerk was directed to terminate the withdrawal motion and remove Leal’s appearance and name from the electronic filing distribution list. The order addressed counsel’s withdrawal and related case-management requirements; it did not decide the underlying claims.