Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_12-cv-01390/USCOURTS-casd-3_12-cv-01390-3/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 890
Nature of Suit: Other Statutory Actions
Cause of Action: 05:0552pa Right to Privacy Act

---

1

3:12-cv-01390-GPC-WVG

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

GARY ATKINS,

Plaintiff,

v.

RAYMOND E. MABUS, Secretary, 

Department of the Navy,

Defendant.

Case No.: 3:12-cv-01390-GPC-WVG

ORDER GRANTING GRADY AND 

ASSOCIATES’ MOTION TO 

WITHDRAW AS COUNSEL OF 

RECORD FOR PLAINTIFF GARY 

ATKINS

[ECF No. 51.]

On February 2, 2017, Grady and Associates, counsel of record for Plaintiff Gary 

Atkins (“Plaintiff”), filed a motion to withdraw as counsel of record on grounds that 

Plaintiff has terminated the attorney-client relationship. (Dkt. No. 51.) No opposition 

has been filed. The Court deems this motion suitable for disposition without oral 

argument pursuant to Civil Local Rule 7.1(d)(1). Having reviewed Defendant’s motion 

and the applicable law, and for the reasons set forth below, the Court GRANTS Grady 

and Associates’ motion to withdraw as counsel of record for Plaintiff.

Case 3:12-cv-01390-GPC-WVG Document 55 Filed 02/27/17 PageID.<pageID> Page 1 of 3
2

3:12-cv-01390-GPC-WVG

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

DISCUSSION

“An attorney may not withdraw as counsel except by leave of court.” Darby v. 

City of Torrance, 810 F. Supp. 275, 276 (C.D. Cal. 1992). The trial court has discretion 

whether to grant or deny an attorney’s motion to withdraw in a civil case. See La Grand 

v. Stewart, 133 F.3d 1253, 1269 (9th Cir. 1998); Stewart v. Boeing Co., No. CV 12-5621 

RSWL(AGRx), 2013 WL 3168269, at *1 (C.D. Cal. June 19, 2013). Courts should 

consider the following factors when ruling upon a motion to withdraw as counsel: (1) the 

reasons why withdrawal is sought; (2) the prejudice withdrawal may cause to other 

litigants; (3) the harm withdrawal might cause to the administration of justice; and (4) the 

degree to which withdrawal will delay the resolution of the case. Curtis v. Illumination 

Arts, Inc., No. C12-0991JLR, 2014 WL 556010, at *4 (W.D. Wash. Feb. 12, 2014); Deal 

v. Countrywide Home Loans, No. C09-01643 SBA, 2010 WL 3702459, at *2 (N.D. Cal. 

Sept. 15, 2010).

Local Civil Rule 83.3(f)(3) also provides: 

Withdrawals. (a) A notice of motion to withdraw as attorney of record must be 

served on the adverse party and on the moving attorney’s client. (b) A declaration 

pertaining to such service must be filed. Failure to make service as required by 

this section or to file the required declaration of service will result in a denial of the 

motion.

CivLR 83.3(f)(3). Here, Grady and Associates has filed a certificate of service which 

indicates that the motion was served on his client and to opposing counsel. (Dkt. No. 51-

3.) 

Rule 3-700 of the California Rules of Professional Conduct of the State Bar of 

California provides that an attorney may request a withdrawal if the client knowingly and 

freely assents to termination of the employment. Cal. R. Prof. Conduct 3-700(C)(5). 

Case 3:12-cv-01390-GPC-WVG Document 55 Filed 02/27/17 PageID.<pageID> Page 2 of 3
3

3:12-cv-01390-GPC-WVG

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

According to the motion to withdraw, Plaintiff has terminated the attorney-client 

relationship between himself and Grady and Associates, Plaintiff’s counsel of record. 

(Dkt. No. 51-1.) Grady and Associates states that withdrawal should not cause undue 

delay, as the depositions of the key witnesses have been rescheduled due to witness 

unavailability. (Id.)

Based on the moving papers and a review of the case, the Court concludes that the 

withdrawal will not prejudice litigants, harm the administration of justice, or unduly 

delay the resolution of the case. No prejudice has been shown, as no party has opposed 

the motion to withdraw. Based on the above, the Court GRANTS Grady and Associates’

motion to withdraw as counsel of record for Plaintiff.

The Clerk of the Court shall indicate on the docket that Plaintiff is now proceeding 

pro se with the following address and provide Plaintiff with a copy of this Order.

Gary Atkins

704 Marbella Circle

Chula Vista, CA 91910

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: February 27, 2017

Case 3:12-cv-01390-GPC-WVG Document 55 Filed 02/27/17 PageID.<pageID> Page 3 of 3