Ortiz v. Eskina 214 Corp.

Background

On August 25, 2022, Bart Mayol, counsel for the defendants, moved under Local Civil Rule 1.4 to withdraw as counsel of record for Defendant Ismael Garcia. Counsel cited Garcia’s lack of cooperation in litigating the case and a conflict that prevented counsel from continuing to represent all defendants. The court had given Garcia until September 2, 2022, to submit any objection, but received none.

Court’s analysis

The court explained that withdrawal requires satisfactory reasons and consideration of the case’s procedural posture. It considered two factors: the reasons for withdrawal and the effect withdrawal would have on the timing of the case.

For the first factor, counsel reported that Garcia had failed to return phone calls and correspondence and had failed to appear for a scheduled deposition. Counsel also reported that Garcia had said he would not oppose the request. In addition, counsel stated that differing positions among the defendants had created a conflict preventing representation of both individual defendants. The court found withdrawal justified.

For the second factor, the court noted that fact discovery was ongoing and that no trial date had been set. It found that withdrawal was unlikely to substantially disrupt the case and that prejudice to the defendants was unlikely. The court therefore found that both factors favored withdrawal.

Order

The court granted the request to withdraw as counsel for Ismael Garcia. Garcia must provide the court with his current address and promptly report any changes. He must attend the case-management conference scheduled for October 24, 2022, at 11:00 a.m., or engage new counsel to attend. The order warns that failure to participate in the case or follow court orders may lead to sanctions or a default judgment.

Bart Mayol was directed to serve the order on Garcia and file proof of service. The court also requested that the Clerk terminate Mayol’s representation of Garcia consistent with the order.