Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_10-cv-02599/USCOURTS-casd-3_10-cv-02599-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 42:1983cv Civil Rights Act - Civil Action for Deprivation of Rights

---

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

NICOLE CHAKER, an individual,

Plaintiff,

CASE NO. 10cv2599-GPC(BGS)

ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO

WITHDRAW AS COUNSEL BY

CARL M. LEWIS; DENYING

MOTION FOR TEMPORARY

STAY; AND SETTING STATUS

HEARING

[Doc. No. 28.]

vs.

ROBERT ADAMS, an individual; Officer

HERZIG, an individual; CITY OF SAN

DIEGO, a government entity; and DOES 1-

50, inclusive

Defendants.

On December 17, 2010, Plaintiff Nicole Chaker filed a 28 U.S.C. § 1983 civil rights complaint

against two San Diego police officers and the City of San Diego. On August 24, 2012, Carl Lewis,

counsel for Plaintiff, filed a motion to withdraw as counsel and for a temporary stay. (Dkt. No. 28.) 

No opposition has been filed. On October 5, 2012, the matter was taken under submission without

oral argument pursuant to Civil Local R. 7.1.d.1. (Dkt. No. 36.) On October 9, 2012, the matter was

transferred to the undersigned judge. (Dkt. No. 37.) After a review of the motion and applicable law,

the Court GRANTS the motion to withdraw as counsel byCarl M. Lewis and DENIES the motion for

a temporary stay. 

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

- 1 - [Case # for Footer ]

Case 3:10-cv-02599-GPC-BGS Document 38 Filed 10/10/12 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

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 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. 

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

15, 2010). 

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 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).

In a declaration, Plaintiff’s counsel provides the following reasons for his motion for

withdrawal, 

[t]hat plaintiff and counsel now have an actual conflict including persistent and

irreconcilable differences, a communication breakdown, and contractual issuesthat,

pursuant to California Rules of Professional Conduct, Rule 3-700, render Counsel

unable to continue to represent Plaintiff in this case and, in fact, compel Counsel

to withdraw as attorney of record in the above-entitled matter.

(Dkt. No. 28-1, Lewis Decl. ¶ 2.) No opposition has been filed. 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. 

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

withdraw as counsel filed byCarl M. Lewis, Esq. The Court DENIES his request for a temporary stay

but GRANTS Plaintiff sixty (60) days from the date of this Order to obtain new counsel. If Plaintiff

does not respond to this Order within 60 days, the Court will deem Plaintiff as proceeding pro se. 

The Court DIRECTS the Clerk of Court to serve a copy of this ORDER on Plaintiff Nicole

Chaker at the following address:

5924 Stadium Street

San Diego, California 92122.

- 2 - [Case # for Footer ]

Case 3:10-cv-02599-GPC-BGS Document 38 Filed 10/10/12 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

Furthermore, the Court sets a status hearing on December 14, 2012 at 1:30 p.m. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

DATED: October 10, 2012

HON. GONZALO P. CURIEL

United States District Judge

- 3 - [Case # for Footer ]

Case 3:10-cv-02599-GPC-BGS Document 38 Filed 10/10/12 Page 3 of 3