Robert E. Renzel Trust et al v. Ventura et al

Northern District of California, cand-4:2015-cv-01648

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY SANCTIONS SHOULD NOT ISSUE Show Cause Response due by 11/23/2016. Signed by Judge Haywood S. Gilliam, Jr. on 11/18/2016.

Interested in this case?

Current View

Full Text

1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 ROBERT E. RENZEL TRUST, et al., 7 Case No. 15-cv-01648-HSG Plaintiffs, 8 ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY v. SANCTIONS SHOULD NOT ISSUE 9 ALFREDO TORRES, et al., Re: Dkt. No. 137 10 Defendants. 11 12 On October 27, 2016, Defendant Gary Tran filed what was framed as a "notice of Northern District of California United States District Court 13 substitution of attorney," in which he asked to "substitute[] himself in pro per in this action[.]" 14 See Dkt. No. 135 at 1. Effectively, the filing seeks to replace what should have been a motion to 15 withdraw as counsel by Defendant's attorney, Jonathan C. Do. Counsel may not withdraw from 16 representing Mr. Tran without the permission of the Court. See Civil L.R. 11-5(a); CA ST RPC 17 Rule 3-700(C); see also Gong v. City of Alameda, No. C 03-05495 TEH, 2008 WL 160964, at *1 18 (N.D. Cal. Jan. 8, 2008) ("[T]he Court has discretion to deny an attorney's request to withdraw 19 where such withdrawal would work an injustice or cause undue delay in the proceeding. . . ." 20 (internal quotation marks omitted)). If Mr. Do wishes to withdraw as counsel for Mr. Tran, he 21 must file a proper motion to withdraw: no "substitution of attorney" has been presented to the 22 Court, because Mr. Tran would be unrepresented if Mr. Do is allowed to withdraw. Unless and 23 until the Court allows Mr. Do to withdraw, he has a continuing duty to represent Mr. Tran. 24 On November 3, 2016, this case was reassigned to the undersigned. The next day, the 25 Court set a case management conference for November 15, 2016. As Mr. Tran's counsel, Mr. Do 26 was required to appear at the case management conference. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(a) 27 (empowering the Court to order counsel to appear at pretrial conferences); Civil L.R. 16-10(c) 28 (requiring counsel to appear at case management conferences). But Mr. Do failed to appear. 1 "Failure by counsel. . . to comply with any duly promulgated local rule or any Federal 2 Rule may be a ground for imposition of any authorized sanction." Civil L.R. 1-4. Accordingly, 3 the Court ORDERS Mr. Do to show cause by November 23, 2016 why the Court should not 4 sanction him for failing to appear at the November 15, 2016 case management conference on 5 behalf of his client, Mr. Tran. 6 IT IS SO ORDERED. 7 Dated: 11/18/2016 8 ______________________________________ HAYWOOD S. GILLIAM, JR. 9 United States District Judge 10 11 12 Northern District of California United States District Court 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2