Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_14-cv-00005/USCOURTS-casd-3_14-cv-00005-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 480
Nature of Suit: Consumer Credit
Cause of Action: 15:1692 Fair Debt Collection 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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

QUINELLA SMITH,

Plaintiffs,

CASE NO. 14-CV-0005 W (DHB)

ORDER GRANTING

PLAINTIFF’S COUNSEL’S

MOTION TO WITHDRAW AS

ATTORNEY OF RECORD

[DOC. 8]

v.

MIDLAND CREDIT

MANAGEMENT, INC.,

Defendant.

Attorney Christopher J. Wrabel and the Law Offices of Chris Wrabel

(collectively “Wrabel”) have filed a motion to withdraw as attorney of record for

Plaintiff Quinella Smith [Doc. 8]. There has been no opposition filed.

“The grant or denial of an attorney’s motion to withdraw in a civil case is a

matter addressed to the discretion of the trial court . . . .” Washington v. Sherwin Real

Estate, Inc., 694 F.2d 1081, 1087 (7th Cir. 1982). Factors considered in evaluating the

motion are “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.” 

CE Resource, Inc. v Magellan Group, LLC, 2009 WL 3367489, at *2 (E.D.Cal. 2009)

-1- 14cv0005

Case 3:14-cv-00005-W-DHB Document 11 Filed 05/14/14 Page 1 of 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

(citing Canandaigua Wine Co., Inc. V. Moldauer, 2009 WL 89141, at *1 (E.D.Cal.

Jan.14, 2009)). 

Wrabel cites two reasons for withdrawing from the case. First, he has been

unable to get a hold of his client and “does not know what the client would like to do

with the case going forward.” (P&A [Doc. 8-1], 2:1–2; Wrabel Dec. [Doc. 8-2], ¶ 3.) 

Second, Wrabel has not been paid for work beyond filing the case. (Wrabel Dec., ¶ 2.)

California Rule of Professional Conduct 3-700(B)(d) provides that an attorney

may seek withdrawal where the client’s conduct “renders it unreasonably difficult for

the member to carry out the employment effectively.” Here, the client’s failure to

respond to Wrabel’s attempt to contact her renders it unreasonably difficult for Wrabel

to carry out his representation of her in this lawsuit. Additionally, the client’s failure

to pay his fees and expenses is sufficient ground to justify withdrawal. See, CA ST RPC

Rule 3-700(B)(f). 

Additionally, there is nothing in the record suggesting that Wrabel’s withdrawal

will prejudice the litigants in this matter, will harm the administration of justice or

unduly delay the resolution of this case. Wrabel has attempted to notify his client of

the motion to withdraw. (Wrabel Dec., ¶ 4.) The motion was also served on Defendant

on April 8, 2014. (Cert. of Service [Doc. 10].) However, to date, neither the client nor

Defendant has filed an opposition to Wrabel’s motion. Finally, given that this case was

filed recently, a pre-trial conference has not yet been scheduled, and there is significant

time left to conduct discovery.

For all these reasons, the Court GRANTS the motion [Doc. 8]. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: May 14, 2014

Hon. Thomas J. Whelan

United States District Judge

-2- 14cv0005

Case 3:14-cv-00005-W-DHB Document 11 Filed 05/14/14 Page 2 of 2