Summary
In Fairchild v. General Motors Acceptance Corp., 254 Miss. 261, 265, 179 So.2d 185, 187 (1965), the Mississippi Supreme Court held that an attorney who had moved to withdraw his representation could not at the same time exercise authority to act on his client's behalf on other matters. While “withdrawal is prospective [and] does not erase those steps in the proceedings already taken,” withdrawal likewise prevents an attorney from taking future steps on behalf of his client.
Summary of this case from Turner v. TurnerOpinion
No. 43624.
October 18, 1965.
1. Attorney and client — withdrawal from case — reasonable notice essential.
Reasonable notice to client is essential before unpaid attorney may withdraw.
2. Attorney and client — ordinarily attorney's acts bind client.
Attorney has charge of client's case, and ordinarily the attorney's acts in respect thereto bind client.
3. Attorney and client — pleadings actually filed not to be withdrawn by attorney upon nonpayment of fee.
Pleadings actually filed in court by a party are pleadings of that party, although prepared by his attorney, and are not subject to unrestricted discretion of attorney so as to permit their withdrawal by attorney upon nonpayment of fee.
4. Attorney and client — withdrawal from case — nonpayment of fee — action for debt — reasonable notice — permission of court.
Attorney whose fee is unpaid has valid cause of action against client for the debt, and in proper case, with consent of the court and after fair warning to client, attorney may withdraw and be relieved of obligation to defend or prosecute further; but both reasonable notice and permission of the court are essential.
5. Attorney and client — withdrawal from case — prospective.
Withdrawal by attorney is prospective, and does not erase steps he has already taken in the proceedings for his client.
6. Attorney and client — withdrawal from case — original pleadings remain official parts of the record.
Amended pleadings, completely superseding or replacing pleadings previously filed, may be filed; but original pleadings remain official parts of court record and are not subject to withdrawal by attorney.
7. Attorney and client — withdrawal from case — no authority to withdraw pleadings.
Authority, if any, of attorney to withdraw client's pleadings does not survive termination of the attorney-client relationship.
8. Attorney and client — withdrawal from case — effect of withdrawal of pleadings without notice on day case set for trial.
Unpaid attorney's withdrawal of client's pleadings without client's knowledge or consent, when case was set for trial and client was absent, in effect deprived client of substantial right.
9. Attorney and client — withdrawal from case — no power to withdraw answer — default judgment set aside.
Unpaid attorney was without power to withdraw client's answer on day of trial, and attempted withdrawal thereof was ineffectual to remove answer from the file and to authorize default judgment against client.
Headnotes as approved by Smith, J.
APPEAL from the Circuit Court of Lowndes County; JOHN D. GREENE, J.
H.K. Van Every, Columbus, for appellants.
I. The Court erred in failing to sustain motion of appellant to set aside the judgment by default. Alexander v. Hyland, 208 Miss. 890, 45 So.2d 739; Badger Mutual Insurance Co. v. Trustees of North Mississippi Hospital, 241 Miss. 15, 128 So.2d 584; Campbell v. Campbell, 231 Miss. 658, 97 So.2d 527; Eisenberg v. Brand, 259 N YS. 57, 144 Misc. 878; Kennard v. State, 240 Miss. 488, 127 So.2d 848; Manning v. Lovett Motor Co., 228 Miss. 191, 87 So.2d 494; Planters Lumber Co. v. Sibley, 130 Miss. 26, 93 So. 440; Southwestern Surety Insurance Co. v. Treadwell, 113 Miss. 189, 74 So. 143; Sec. 1519, Code 1942; 7 C.J.S., Withdrawal of Attorneys, Sec. 110 pp. 943, 944.
II. The Court erred in not awarding a writ of inquiry to ascertain the true value of the property at the time it came into possession of appellant. Fernwood Lumber Co. v. Rowley, 110 Miss. 821, 71 So. 3; Mississippi Central R. Co. v. Fort, 44 Miss. 423; Skrmetta v. Clark, 180 Miss. 21, 177 So. 11; Sec. 1547, Code 1942; 89 C.J.S., Trover and Conversion, Sec. 163 p. 642.
III. Said default judgment was void for, when rendered, a pleading was still on file and not ruled upon. J.B. Colt Co. v. Ward, 135 Miss. 202, 99 So. 676; Randall v. Gunter, 181 Miss. 332, 179 So. 362; 30A Am. Jur., Judgments, 280, Sub. 199 p. 281; 49 C.J.S., Judgments, Sec. 199(I)(1) p. 352.
W.H. Jolly, Columbus, for appellee.
I. The sustaining or overruling of appellant's motion to set aside a default judgment was within the sound discretion of the Court, and in this case the discretion was not abused by the Court.
A. The trial court did not abuse discretion by permitting appellant's attorney to withdraw answer.
B. Appellant had no meritorious defense to the suit.
Collation of authorities: Hurst v. Gulf State Creosoting Co., 163 Miss. 512, 141 So. 346; Lindsey v. Sellers, 26 Miss. 169; Mississippi Motor Finance Co. v. Thomas, 246 Miss. 14, 149 So.2d 20; Newman v. Taylor, 69 Miss. 670, 13 So. 831; Stewart v. Brooks, 62 Miss. 492; Walton v. Gregory Funeral Home, 170 Miss. 129, 154 So. 717; 30A Am. Jur., Judgments, Secs. 201, 632, 636, 656 pp. 282, 605, 609, 626; 49 C.J.S., Judgments, Sec. 349 p. 703.
The appellant, Marion Fairchild, d/b/a Fairchild's Motors, employed an attorney to defend an action brought against him by appellee, General Motors Acceptance Corporation, in the Circuit Court of Lowndes County.
The attorney prepared for his client and filed in the case a special demurrer and an answer to the declaration. These pleadings became the pleadings of the defendant in the case and were official records of the circuit court.
Appellant failed to pay his attorney the fee due him for services rendered. On the first day of the September term the attorney wrote to the appellant and advised him that the case was set for trial on the following day. This letter reached appellant on the afternoon of that day. In the letter, the attorney directed the appellant's attention to the fact that his fee had not been paid and that "unless you make some arrangements to the contrary, I am certain he (plaintiff) will take a judgment against you on Tuesday."
(Hn 1) When the case was called, the attorney announced to the court that his fee had not been paid him; that he withdrew as counsel for appellant; and, that he withdrew appellant's answer which had been filed previously. The appellant was not present and had not been notified that this action was contemplated by his attorney. Reasonable notice to the party was essential. Blackwell v. Midland Federal Sav. Loan Ass'n., 132 Colo. 45, 284 P.2d 1060 (1955); Parks v. Coyne, 156 Mo. App. 379, 137 S.W. 335 (1911).
Following this announcement, appellant was called and having failed to answer was declared to be in default. The next day an order was entered overruling the demurrer and a default judgment was entered citing the default of the appellant on the previous day and the withdrawal of appellant's answer by his attorney.
(Hn 2) An attorney has charge of his client's case, and ordinarily his acts in respect thereto bind the client. However, pleadings actually filed in court by a party, although prepared by his attorney, are the pleadings of the party. (Hn 3) The pleadings are not subject to the unrestricted discretion of the attorney so as to permit their withdrawal by the attorney upon nonpayment of his fee. (Hn 4) If the attorney's fee remains unpaid, he has a valid cause of action against his client for the debt. Moreover, in a proper case, with the consent of the court and after fair warning to his client of his intention to do so, he may withdraw and be relieved of his obligation to defend or prosecute the case further. Both reasonable notice to the client and permission of the court are essential. Miss. Rules of Professional Conduct, No. 44 (1962), 33 Miss. L.J. 461 (1962); 7 Am.Jur.2d, Attorneys at Law, §§ 143, 144, 145, 221, 222 (1963).
(Hn 5) But such withdrawal is prospective. It does not erase those steps in the proceedings already taken.
(Hn 6) Amended pleadings may be filed, of course, which may completely supersede or replace pleadings previously filed; but, even so, the latter remain official parts of the court record and are not subject to withdrawal by an attorney.
(Hn 7) In the case before the court here, the appellant's answer was on file and its withdrawal was coincident with the attorney's withdrawal from the case. If it were conceded that so long as the attorney continued to represent his client he might withdraw his client's pleadings, such authority would not survive the termination of the relationship. (Hn 8) The withdrawal of appellant's pleadings without his knowledge or consent, when the case was set for trial and the appellant was absent, had the effect of depriving appellant of a substantial right.
(Hn 9) The attorney was without power to withdraw his client's pleadings under the circumstances in the record, and such attempted withdrawal was wholly ineffectual to remove the pleadings from the file.
49 C.J.S. Withdrawal of Appearance § 197 (1947) states:
". . . However, the withdrawal of the attorney's appearance after the filing of a plea does not withdraw the plea so as to justify a judgment by default; and, where an attorney abandons his client's cause without notice, the client should be given a reasonable time to secure other counsel before judgment is taken against him by default."
Muenster v. Tremont Nat. Bank, 92 Tex. 422, 49 S.W. 362 (1899).
Since appellant's answer had been duly filed and had not been stricken by an order of the court, and no ground for striking it appearing in the record, judgment by default should not have been entered against appellant. Randall v. Gunter, 181 Miss. 332, 179 So. 362 (1938).
Upon learning of the action taken, appellant promptly employed another attorney and during the term duly moved to set aside the default judgment. This motion should have been sustained.
Reversed and remanded.
Ethridge, P.J., Rodgers, Jones and Patterson, JJ., concur.