Vick v. Hudson Bay Master Fund Ltd.

Background

The Basile Law Firm P.C. moved to withdraw as counsel for Plaintiff Shadwrick J. Vick and asked the court to seal the papers supporting that motion. Vick told the chambers of Judge Jessica G. L. Clarke that he did not oppose the withdrawal but opposed sealing. He also asked the court to place his email submission on the public docket. The court later clarified that neither Vick nor the Firm needed to make additional submissions about the withdrawal motion.

Sealing

The court declined to unseal the Firm’s submissions or publicly file Vick’s submission. It maintained those materials in camera, meaning for the court’s private review, and under seal to protect attorney-client confidences. Vick was allowed to share his submission with fellow shareholders.

Withdrawal of Counsel

Local Civil Rule 1.4 requires a lawyer to obtain the court’s permission before withdrawing from a case. The court considers whether there is a satisfactory reason for withdrawal and the effect of withdrawal on the case’s timing. Vick and the Firm agreed that an irreconcilable breakdown in their attorney-client relationship was the reason for the request. The court held that the breakdown itself was sufficient and did not assign blame to either Vick or the Firm. It also stated that any malpractice claim against the Firm would have to be brought in a separate action.

The court noted that the case was at a very early stage and that the defendants had not appeared, so allowing withdrawal would not significantly affect the case’s timing. The court therefore granted the motion to withdraw.

Effect on the Case

Because the case is brought derivatively—that is, on behalf of Vinco Ventures, Inc.—Vick cannot proceed without counsel. The court stayed the action until May 3, 2024, to give Vick time to obtain new counsel and to allow new counsel to become familiar with the case. New counsel was required to appear by May 3 and to attend the previously scheduled initial case-management conference on May 6, 2024, or timely request a reasonable adjournment.

Because the Firm was not asserting a lien, the court ordered it to immediately provide files and work product specific to this case and refund Vick’s retainer in accordance with the Firm’s prior submissions. The court took no position on Vick’s claim that he was entitled to additional work product not specific to this case and stated that any dispute about those documents would have to be addressed separately.

Disposition

The motion to withdraw was GRANTED. The Clerk was directed to terminate the motion and remove Waleed Amer and Mark R. Basile as counsel of record for Vick. The action was stayed until May 3, 2024.