Carter et al v. Paschall Truck Lines, Inc.. et al, No. 5:2018cv00041 - Document 224 (W.D. Ky. 2021)

Court Description: OPINION AND ORDER Signed by Magistrate Judge Lanny King on 2/9/2021: Plaintiff's Motion 223 to Withdraw as Counsel is DENIED without prejudice. cc: Counsel (JM)

Download PDF
Carter et al Case v. Paschall Truck Lines, Inc.. et al 5:18-cv-00041-BJB-LLK Document 224 Filed 02/09/21 Page 1 of 2 PageID #: 7556 Doc. 224 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY PADUCAH DIVISION CASE NO. 5:18-CV-00041-BJB-LLK GALE CARTER, et al. PLAINTIFFS v. PASCHALL TRUCK LINES, INC., et al. DEFENDANTS OPINION AND ORDER This matter is before the Court on the motion of the Defendant Element Fleet Management Corp. and Element Transportation, LLC’s, (“Element’s”), attorney to withdraw as counsel. [DN 223]. For the reasons discussed below, the Motion is DENIED. Local Rule 83.6 provides three circumstances where an attorney may withdraw outside of the 21-day window of trial. These are: (a) The attorney files a motion, his or her client consents in writing, and another attorney enters his or her appearance; or (b) The attorney files a motion, certifies the motion was served on the client, makes a showing of good cause, and the Court consents to the withdrawal on whatever terms the Court chooses to impose. (c) In cases where an attorney seeks to be substituted for another as attorney of record, and both attorneys are within the same partnership or other legal professional association, a notice of substitution must be filed by the withdrawing attorney and the substitute attorney with an affirmative representation stating that the substitution is made with the client's consent; the notice may, but need not be, signed by the client. Here, where Richard L. Etter will remain as counsel to Element and the attorney filed their motion to withdraw, the attorney has attempted compliance with LR 83.6(a). However, Local Rule 83.6(a) requires “his or her client consents in writing” which has not been provided. Therefore, the Plaintiff has failed to meet the consent requirement of LR 83.6(a) 1 Dockets.Justia.com Case 5:18-cv-00041-BJB-LLK Document 224 Filed 02/09/21 Page 2 of 2 PageID #: 7557 IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the Plaintiff’s Motion to Withdraw as Counsel is DENIED without prejudice. IT IS SO ORDERED. February 9, 2021 C: Counsel 2

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.