Opinion ID: 835263
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 5

Heading: The Accused Seeks to Withdraw

Text: When Hoyt prevented his attorneys from asserting the farmer defense, he also instructed the accused to withdraw. On June 11, 1997, the accused filed such a motion, together with a supporting affidavit indicating the limited capacity in which he had been retained: 1. I am one of the attorneys for the debtor herein. 2. I was retained by the debtor in this matter on a temporary basis to facilitate filing of initial pleadings and early appearances in this case, only. I was not retained to permanently represent the debtor in this matter. 3. I have now been instructed by W.J. Hoyt III, general partner of the debtor, to take no further action in this matter and to withdraw as counsel of record. The bankruptcy judge did not grant the accused's motion and instead prevailed upon him to continue in his capacity as local counsel to assist the court in administration of the case. The accused recognized that his continued representation of the investor partnerships potentially could pose a conflict of interest. In July 1997, the accused wrote a letter to Hoyt and three of Hoyt's independent attorneys, advising them that he had a potential conflict of interest and seeking their advice and assistance in determining the appropriate role for me in these cases.