Evony, LLC v. Aeria Games & Entertainment Inc
4:11-cv-00141
N.D. Cal.Sep 28, 2012Background
- Plaintiff Evony sued Feng Investment and others in the Northern District of California; Newman Du Wors LLP moved to withdraw as counsel for Feng Investment.
- Evony opposed withdrawal on grounds of lack of proper notice and potential prejudice without substitute counsel.
- The court denied the motion without prejudice, finding noncompliance with Civil Local Rule 11-5(a) and California Rules of Professional Conduct 3-700(A)(2).
- Newman Firm claimed they provided written notice on September 28, 2011 but did not submit a copy of the notice with the motion.
- The court determined there was no evidence showing reasonable advance written notice or steps to avoid prejudice to Feng Investment.
- The order requires proof of satisfaction of Local Rule 11-5 and the California Rules for a renewed withdrawal motion.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the Newman Firm complied with Civ. L.R. 11-5(a) notice requirements | Evony argues no reasonable written notice in advance. | Newman contends notice was provided but failed to submit proof. | Noncompliance; withdrawal denied without prejudice |
| Whether the Newman Firm complied with California Rules of Professional Conduct 3-700(A)(2) | Evony asserts failure to inform Feng Investment and mitigate prejudice. | Newman asserts withdrawal allowed with notice, but evidence is lacking. | Noncompliance; withdrawal denied without prejudice |
| Whether withdrawal would prejudice Evony and whether alternative service could be arranged | Evony would be prejudiced without substitute counsel or service provisions. | Firm claims potential difficulties due to communication issues with Feng Investment. | Withdrawal denied without prejudice to permit a renewed motion with proper showing |
Key Cases Cited
- Nehad v. Mukasey, 535 F.3d 962 (9th Cir. 2008) (California professional-conduct standards apply to withdrawal)
- D-Beam Ltd. P'ship v. Roller Derby Skates, Inc., 366 F.3d 972 (9th Cir. 2004) (corporations appear through counsel; default judgments considerations)
- Employee Painters' Trust v. Ethan Enters., Inc., 480 F.3d 993 (9th Cir. 2007) (proper withdrawal where corporation fails to retain substitute counsel)
- United States v. Carter, 560 F.3d 1107 (9th Cir. 2009) (discretion to permit withdrawal)