Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_15-cv-01257/USCOURTS-casd-3_15-cv-01257-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 893
Nature of Suit: Environmental Matters
Cause of Action: 42:9607 Real Property Tort to Land - Liability

---

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

LAWRENCE "CHIP" CRANDALL

AND ALICIA BERRY AS

COTRUSTEES OF THE

REVOCABLE INTERVIVOS TRUST

OF MARJORIE M. CRANDALL

DATED FEBRUARY 28, 1991 AS

RESTATED IN FULL ON APRIL 7,

2011,

Plaintiff,

CASE NO. 15cv1257-GPC(NLS)

ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO

WITHDRAW AS ATTORNEY FOR

DEFENDANTS AND

COUNTERCLAIMANTS

FAIRLANE CLEANERS, INC.;

ALEXANDER G. SHAW; AND

CINDY CASSELMAN

[Dkt. No. 37.]

vs.

SEMILLON INC. dba FAIRLANE

CLEANERS, a California corporation;

FAIRLANE CLEANERS, INC., a

California corporation; and THOMAS

E. MULLINS, an individual;

ALEXANDER G. SHAW, an

individual; and CINDY L.

CASSELMAN, an individual; and

DOES 1 through 100, inclusive,,

Defendants.

On February 2, 2016, Duckor Spradling Metzger & Wynne, attorney for

Defendants and Counterclaimants Fairlane Cleaners, Inc., Alexander G. Shaw and

Cindy Casselman, filed a motion to withdraw as attorney. No opposition has been

filed. The Court finds it suitable to decide the matter based on the unopposed motion. 

See Civil Local Rule 7.1(d)(1). 

- 1 - [15cv1257-GPC(NLS)]

Case 3:15-cv-01257-GPC-NLS Document 43 Filed 03/03/16 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

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. 

Washington v. Sherwin Real Estate, Inc., 694 F.2d 1081, 1087 (7th Cir. 1982). Courts

should consider the following factors when ruling upon a motion to withdraw as

counsel:

(1) the reasons why withdrawal issought; (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. 

Deal v. Countrywide Home Loans, No. C09-01643 SBA, 2010 WL 3702459, at *2

(N.D. Cal. Sept. 15, 2010). Rule 3-700 ofthe CaliforniaRules of Professional Conduct

of the State Bar of California provides that an attorney may request a withdrawal if it

is unreasonably difficult for counsel to carry out his employment effectively or if the

client breaches an obligation as to expenses or fees. Cal. R. Prof. Conduct

3-700(C)(1)(d) &(f). Failure to pay counsel can be a valid reason for withdrawal. 

Indymac Federal Bank, FSB v. McComic, No. 08cv1871-IEG(WVG), 2010 WL

2000013, at *1 (S.D. Cal. 2010). 

In a declaration, defense counsel asserts that it would be unreasonably difficult

for the firm to continue to represent Defendants because they are in arrears in paying

attorneys’ fees and costs, and there is no indication that the balance will be paid in the

foreseeable future. (Dkt. No. 37-2, Keith Decl. ¶¶ 3, 4, 7.) In addition, no party will

be prejudiced because the case is only at its initial stages as no discovery has

commenced in this matter. 

Based on the moving papers, and no opposition having been filed, the Court

concludes that the withdrawal will not prejudice litigants, harm the administration of

justice or unduly delay the resolution of the case. 

Good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Court GRANTS the

- 2 - [15cv1257-GPC(NLS)]

Case 3:15-cv-01257-GPC-NLS Document 43 Filed 03/03/16 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

motion to withdraw as counsel filed by Duckor, Spradling Metzger & Wynne ALC. 

Defendants and Counterclaimants Alexander G. Shaw and Cindy Casselman shall file

an order for substitution of counsel or notify the Court they intend to proceed in pro per

on or before April 18, 2016. 

Defendant and Counterclaimant Fairlane Cleaners, Inc., a corporation, may not

proceed in federal court without counsel. Rowland v. California Men’s Colony, Unit

II Men’s Advisory Council, 506 U.S. 194, 201-02 (1993); see also United States v.

High Country Broadcasting Co. Inc., 3 F.3d 1244, 1245 (9th Cir. 1993); C.E. Pope

Equity Trust v. United States, 818 F.2d 696, 697-98 (9th Cir. 1987); Civil Local Rule

83.3k (“all other parties, including corporations; partnerships and other legal entities

may appear in court only through an attorney permitted to practice pursuant to Civil

Local Rule 83.3.”). Therefore, the Court grants Fairlane Cleaners, Inc. until April 18,

2016 to obtain substitute counsel and have counsel file a notice of appearance. 

Fairlane Cleaners, Inc. is notified that if it failsto obtain new counsel and have counsel

file a notice of appearance, it may be subject to default proceedings. See High Country

Broadcasting Co., Inc., 3 F.3d at 1245. 

The Court DIRECTS Duckor, Spradling Metzger & Wynne ALC serve a copy

of this ORDER on each of the Defendants. The hearing set for March 4, 2016 shall be

vacated. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

DATED: March 3, 2016

HON. GONZALO P. CURIEL

United States District Judge

- 3 - [15cv1257-GPC(NLS)]

Case 3:15-cv-01257-GPC-NLS Document 43 Filed 03/03/16 Page 3 of 3