Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_04-cv-00377/USCOURTS-caed-2_04-cv-00377-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Civil Rights Act

---

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

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

----oo0oo----

MARQUES PHILLIPS and CYNTHIA

M.PHILLIPS,

NO. CIV. S-04-0377 FCD PAN

Plaintiffs,

v. ORDER

CITY OF FAIRFIELD, CHIEF OF

POLICE WILLIAM GRESHAM and

Does 1 through 10, MARK

SCHRAER, CHAD TIGERT and

STEVE TROJANOWSKI, JR., and

Does 11 through 20,

Defendants.

----oo0oo----

This matter is before the court on motion by William C.

Collier (“Collier”), to withdraw as counsel for plaintiffs,

Marques Phillips and Cynthia Phillips (collectively “plaintiffs”)

pursuant to Eastern District Local Rule 83-182(d). Plaintiffs

have filed letters with the court indicating that they oppose

withdrawal of Mr. Collier as their counsel. Defendants do not

Case 2:04-cv-00377-FCD-EFB Document 36 Filed 04/18/05 Page 1 of 3
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

1 Defendants have filed a motion for summary judgment

which is currently set for hearing on May 13, 2005.

2

oppose Mr. Collier’s withdrawal, though they oppose any

continuance to permit plaintiffs to obtain new counsel.1 The

court held a hearing on the motion to withdraw on April 15, 2005. 

Present were Mr. Collier, plaintiff Cynthia Phillips, and counsel

for defendants. The court subsequently cleared the courtroom and

held an in camera hearing at which were present Mr. Collier and

Ms. Phillips and court personnel. 

Eastern District Local Rule 83-182(d) provides that

“[withdrawal as attorney is governed by the Rules of Professional

Conduct of the State Bar of California, and the attorney shall

conform to the requirements of those Rules.” E.D. Cal. Local

Rule 83-182(d). California Rule of Professional Conduct 3-700

provides in relevant part:

(C) Permissive Withdrawal.

If rule 3-700(B) is not applicable, a member may not

request permission to withdraw in matters pending

before a tribunal, and may not withdraw in other

matters, unless such request or such withdrawal is

because:

(1) The client

(a) insists upon presenting a claim or defense

that is not warranted under existing law and

cannot be supported by good faith argument for an

extension, modification, or reversal of existing

law, or

(b) seeks to pursue an illegal course of conduct,

or

(c) insists that the member pursue a course of

conduct that is illegal or that is prohibited

under these rules or the State Bar Act, or

(d) by other conduct renders it unreasonably

difficult for the member to carry out the

employment effectively, or

(e) insists, in a matter not pending before a

tribunal, that the member engage in conduct that

is contrary to the judgment and advice of the

member but not prohibited under these rules or the

State Bar Act, or

Case 2:04-cv-00377-FCD-EFB Document 36 Filed 04/18/05 Page 2 of 3
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

2 Should plaintiffs seek additional continuance, they or

their counsel may move to amend the dates set herein pursuant to

Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(b).

3

(f) breaches an agreement or obligation to the

member as to expenses or fees.

(2) The continued employment is likely to result in a

violation of these rules or of the State Bar Act; or

. . .

(5) The client knowingly and freely assents to

termination of the employment . . ..

California Rule of Professional Conduct 3-700. The court

finds that Mr. Collier should be permitted to withdraw as counsel

for plaintiffs. His continued representation under the

circumstances would be unreasonably difficult and does not appear

to be in the best interest of plaintiffs. 

Mr. Collier is directed to turn over plaintiffs’ file

promptly and in an orderly fashion. See Cal. Rule of Prof.

Conduct 3-700(d).

 In order to provide plaintiffs an opportunity to obtain

substitute counsel, the court vacates all current dates, which

were set by minute order on March 29, 2005. The court will hold

a status conference on May 27, 2005 at 10:00 A.M. The hearing on

defendants’ motion for summary judgment is set for July 8, 2005

at 10:00 A.M. The Final Pretrial Conference is set for September

30, 2005 at 3:30 P.M. and Trial is set on November 29, 2005 at

9:00 A.M.2

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: April 15, 2005

/s/ Frank C. Damrell Jr. 

FRANK C. DAMRELL, Jr.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 2:04-cv-00377-FCD-EFB Document 36 Filed 04/18/05 Page 3 of 3