Skyline Risk Management, Inc. v. Legakis
- Subramanian
- 1:20-cv-08395
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
In Skyline Risk Management v. Legakis, Judge Subramanian set deadlines for replacing corporate counsel after permitting counsel to seek withdrawal.
Skyline Risk Management, Inc., its current counsel, George Menexas, and the defendants were affected by the deadlines and conditions governing Skyline’s possible change of counsel, settlement discussions, pretrial proceedings, and trial.
What happened
Skyline Risk Management’s counsel asked to withdraw, citing communication problems and an irreconcilable conflict that hindered trial preparation. The court held a hearing, including a sealed private hearing with Skyline’s principal and current counsel.
The court allowed Skyline to look for new counsel but required current counsel to remain through May 20, 2024, to assist with settlement and the search. Skyline had to secure new counsel by that date because a corporation may appear in federal court only through a licensed lawyer.
Judge Arun Subramanian ordered counsel to update the court on May 13 and set consequences and new case deadlines. If new counsel did not appear by May 20, current counsel was to renew the withdrawal request, which the court said would then be granted; defendants could seek a default judgment. The court also postponed the pretrial conference and trial if new counsel appeared.
The detailed version
- Skyline Risk Management, Inc. v. Legakis · No. 1:20-cv-08395
- Subramanian
- May 8, 2024
Background
On May 2, 2024, counsel for Skyline Risk Management, Inc. moved to withdraw from the case. Counsel cited a breakdown in communications and an irreconcilable conflict, stating that Skyline either did not respond or gave completely unresponsive answers and that this impaired counsel’s ability to prepare for trial.
The court held a hearing on May 8. Without objection from any party, it conducted a sealed, private hearing on the record with George Menexas, Skyline’s principal, and Skyline’s current counsel, Mr. Schlossberg. Menexas indicated that he wanted new representation.
Order
The court permitted Skyline to seek new counsel under a strict schedule. Until new counsel was located—or if none was located—Mr. Schlossberg was to remain Skyline’s counsel through May 20, 2024, for settlement discussions and assistance in finding new counsel.
The court ordered Menexas to contact the insurance carrier by the end of May 8, and allowed defendants to contact the carrier on May 9. Mr. Schlossberg was ordered to file and serve a May 13 letter stating whether the case had been resolved and whether Menexas had secured new counsel.
Because Skyline is a corporation, the court stated that it may appear in federal court only through licensed counsel. New counsel therefore had to be secured by May 20. If new counsel did not enter an appearance by then, Mr. Schlossberg was directed to renew his withdrawal motion, which the court stated would then be granted for the reasons given at the hearing. On or after that date, defendants could seek a default judgment and other relief they considered warranted.
If new counsel appeared, the court extended the deadline for the joint pretrial order to June 3, set June 7 as the deadline for opposition to motions in limine, adjourned the final pretrial conference to June 10 at 10:00 a.m., and adjourned the trial to June 11. The court stated that it would not grant extensions of those dates. Counsel also had to serve the order on Skyline and Menexas by May 8 using the methods specified by the court.
Disposition
Judge Arun Subramanian did not grant the withdrawal motion in this order. Instead, the court permitted Skyline to seek replacement counsel, kept Mr. Schlossberg as counsel through May 20, set related deadlines, and directed that the withdrawal motion be renewed if new counsel did not appear. The court stated that the renewed motion would then be granted.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.