Snediker

Snediker v. Saul

Good Law
United States District Court, Southern District of CaliforniaOctober 13, 20203:20-cv-01200California589 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 DAVID SNEDIKER, Case No.: 20cv1200-BAS-LL

Plaintiff,

ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO

v. WITHDRAW

ANDREW SAUL, [ECF No. 14] Defendant. 16 Currently before the Court is a Motion to Withdraw Stuart Barasch as counsel of record for Plaintiff pursuant to Local Rule 83.3(f). ECF No. 14. This is Mr. Barasch’s second Motion to Withdraw. See ECF No. 12. The Court denied Mr. Barasch’s first Motion on procedural grounds. ECF No. 13. In support of the instant Motion, Mr. Barasch states Plaintiff has hired different local counsel—Martha W. Yancey. ECF No. 14 at 1. “An attorney may not withdraw as counsel except by leave of court, and the decision to grant or deny counsel’s motion to withdraw is committed to the discretion of the trial court.” Beard v. Shuttermart of Cal., Inc., No. 07CV594WQH (NLS), 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 10575, at *6 (S.D. Cal. Feb. 13, 2008) (internal quotation marks and citation 26 …

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.