Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_14-cv-00714/USCOURTS-cand-3_14-cv-00714-9/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 110
Nature of Suit: Insurance
Cause of Action: 28:1332 Diversity-Insurance Contract

---

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 

Case No. 14-cv-00714 NC 

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION 

SENATOR HOTEL DEVELOPMENT 

COMPANY, 

 Plaintiff, 

 v. 

TRAVELERS PROPERTY CASUALTY 

COMPANY OF AMERICA, DOES 1 to 15, 

 Defendants. 

Case No. 14-cv-00714 NC

ORDER REGARDING 

SUBSTITUTION OF ATTORNEYS 

and ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE TO 

MICHAEL F. SILBERSTEIN RE: 

SANCTIONS 

Dkt. No. 39 

This order addresses the notice of substitution of counsel, Dkt. No. 39, indicating that 

plaintiff substitutes William E. Taggart, Jr. as its attorney of record in the place of Michael 

F. Silberstein. Dkt. No. 39. 

As an initial matter, a notice of substitution is appropriate when counsel from the 

same firm replace one another as the representative of a client, which is not the case here. 

See Civ. L.R. 5-1(c)(2)(B). “The replacement of one firm by another as counsel for a party 

is governed by Civil L.R. 11-5 and requires an order of the Court.” Civ. L.R. 5-1(c)(2)(E). 

Rule 11-5 provides that “[c]ounsel may not withdraw from an action until relieved by order 

of Court after written notice has been given reasonably in advance to the client and to all 

other parties who have appeared in the case.” Civ. L.R. 11-5(a). 

The Court grants the request to permit William E. Taggart, Jr. to act as attorney of 

record for plaintiff. 

Case 3:14-cv-00714-NC Document 40 Filed 01/23/15 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

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

Case No

ORDER

H

withdraw

the webs

eligible 

be a mem

eligible 

must be 

1(b). He

repeated

plaintiff

writing w

the Cour

Inc., 501

Such san

Northern

appropri

6(a). An

by an af

5(a). Af

determin

 IT

D

. 14-cv-007

R TO SHOW

owever, the

w from the 

site of the S

to practice 

mber of the

for admissi

an active m

ere, Michae

dly represen

f in this Cou

why he sho

rt’s inheren

1 U.S. 32, 4

nctions may

n District S

iate discipli

ny factual a

ffidavit or d

fter reviewi

ne whether 

T IS SO OR

ate: January

14 NC 

 CAUSE 

e Court defe

case for the

State Bar of

law as of Ju

e bar of this

ion to and c

member in g

el F. Silbers

nted to the C

urt. By Feb

ould not be s

nt power to 

46-49 (1991

y include a 

tanding Co

inary author

assertions m

declaration a

ing the writ

an evidenti

RDERED. 

y 23, 2015 

 

ers ruling o

e following

f California

uly 1, 2014

 Court to pr

continuing m

good standi

stein contin

Court that h

bruary 6, 20

sanctioned 

impose san

1); Fink v. G

formal repr

ommittee on

rity in Calif

made in resp

and by appr

tten respons

iary hearing

 2 

n the reque

g reason. It 

 shows that

4. The Loca

ractice in th

membership

ng of the St

nued practic

he is capable

015, Michae

under Fede

nctions for t

Gomez, 239

rimand, mo

n Profession

fornia or th

ponse to the

ropriate refe

se to the ord

g is necessa

 ____ Nath

Unit

est to allow 

has come t

t Michael F

al Rules req

his Court.” 

p in the bar

tate Bar of 

cing in this C

e of litigatin

el F. Silbers

eral Rule of

this conduct

9 F.3d 989, 

onetary sanc

nal Conduct

he Northern 

e order to sh

ferences to t

der to show

ary. 

__________ hanael M. C

ted States M

Michael F.

to the Court

F. Silberstein

quire that “a

 Civ. L.R. 1

r of this Cou

California.

Court after 

ng the case

stein must s

f Civil Proc

t. See Cham

993-94 (9th

ctions, refer

t, the Chief

District. S

how cause m

the record. 

w cause, the 

__________ Cousins 

Magistrate J

 Silberstein

t’s attention

n became n

an attorney 

11-1(a). “T

urt an attorn

” Civ. L.R

July 1, 201

e on behalf o

show cause 

edure 11 an

mbers v. NA

h Cir. 2001)

rral to the 

f Judge, or a

See Civ. L.R

must be sup

See Civ. L

Court will 

____ 

Judge 

n to 

n that 

not 

must 

To be 

ney 

R. 11-

14, and 

of 

in 

nd/or 

ASCO, 

). 

another 

R. 11-

pported 

.R. 7-

Case 3:14-cv-00714-NC Document 40 Filed 01/23/15 Page 2 of 2