Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_19-cv-01846/USCOURTS-cand-4_19-cv-01846-3/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 365
Nature of Suit: Personal Injury - Product Liability
Cause of Action: 28:1332 Diversity-Auto Negligence

---

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

Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

FAYE VADEN, et al.,

Plaintiffs,

v.

LINN STAR TRANSFER, INC., et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 19-cv-01846-HSG 

ORDER SETTING HEARING ON 

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

Re: Dkt. No. 43

Pending before the Court is a motion to withdraw as counsel for Plaintiffs Faye Vaden and 

Alma Jackson, filed by Mr. David Ratner. See Dkt. No. 32. On October 9, 2019, the Court issued 

an order to show cause why (1) the motion to withdraw should not be denied for failure to obtain 

client consent and to avoid reasonably foreseeable prejudice to his clients from his withdrawal; 

and why (2) Mr. Ratner should not be sanctioned for failing to appear at the October 8, 2019, 

hearing while still counsel of record for Plaintiffs in this matter. See Dkt. No. 43. In response, 

Mr. Ratner explained that he has since obtained client consent for his withdrawal, although he 

does not yet have a signed document to this effect. See Dkt. No. 45.

The California Rules of Professional Conduct provide limited grounds under which a 

lawyer may withdraw from representing a client. See California Rules of Professional Conduct 

1.16(b). And even if a client “knowingly[] and freely assents to termination of the representation,” 

counsel must still “take[] reasonable[] steps to avoid reasonably[] foreseeable prejudice to the 

rights of the client . . . .” Id. at Rule 1.16(b)(6), (d). Additionally, under the Civil Local Rules 

“[c]ounsel may not withdraw from an action until relieved by order of Court . . . .” See Civil L.R. 

11-5(a). As the Court indicated in its order to show cause, the Court remains concerned that 

Plaintiffs’ counsel may have not ensured that their clients will not be prejudiced as a result of Mr. 

Case 4:19-cv-01846-HSG Document 50 Filed 10/16/19 Page 1 of 2
2

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

Northern District of California

Ratner’s withdrawal.

Accordingly, the Court SETS a hearing on the order to show cause on October 22, 2019, at 

2:00 p.m. Both Ms. Chau and Mr. Ratner shall attend the hearing in person. The Court further 

DIRECTS Mr. Ratner to bring with him the signed consent order granting substitution of attorney 

(form AO154) or another signed statement indicating that his clients consent to his withdrawal.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: 10/16/2019

______________________________________

HAYWOOD S. GILLIAM, JR.

United States District Judge

Case 4:19-cv-01846-HSG Document 50 Filed 10/16/19 Page 2 of 2