McKinley
McKinley v. Miller
Opinion
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 TERRY McKINLEY, Case No.: 3:15-cv-00228-WQH-RBB
Plaintiff,
ORDER
vs. B. HUGIE, Correctional Officer, Defendant. 16 HAYES, Judge: 17 The matters before the Court are the Motion to Withdraw as Counsel of Record (ECF 18 No. 123) filed by counsel for Plaintiff Terry McKinley, Allen Matkins Leck Gamble 19 Mallory & Natsis LLP (“Allen Matkins”), and the Joint Motion to Stay Proceedings (ECF 20 No. 124). 21 Counsel for Plaintiff requests withdrawal on the following grounds: (1) “there has 22 been a fundamental breakdown in the attorney-client relationship and a material inability 23 for Allen Matkins to carry out a full and zealous representation of Plaintiff in this matter”; 24 and (2) “Plaintiff has breached the obligations necessary to the representation.” (ECF No. 25 123-1 at 2.) Counsel contends that “attorney-client privilege obligations prevent a more 26 detailed explanation.” Id. In support of its motion, counsel provides the Declaration of 27 Ryan T.…