From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Nelson v. Runnels

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Jan 4, 2013
NO. CIV. S-06-1289 LKK/KJN P (E.D. Cal. Jan. 4, 2013)

Opinion

NO. CIV. S-06-1289 LKK/KJN P

01-04-2013

RAYMOND PAUL NELSON, Plaintiff, v. D. L. RUNNELS, et al., Defendants.


ORDER

Previously, the court appointed James J. Goodwin to represent the plaintiff, who until then had proceeded pro per. The case was set for pretrial conference on January 7, 2013. The court having reviewed the papers in preparation for pretrial has concluded that appointed counsel has failed to do even the most basic things necessary for trial.

Although nothing in the documents suggest it, it may be that counsel concluded that there was no merit in the case. If so, he should have so informed his client and requested to be relieved. He did not do so. In any event, the appointment of Mr. Goodwin is withdrawn. The court refers the matter back to the ADR and Pro Bono Coordinator to seek another, different counsel. The matter is now STAYED pending appointment of different counsel.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

____________

LAWRENCE K. KARLTON

SENIOR JUDGE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT


Summaries of

Nelson v. Runnels

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Jan 4, 2013
NO. CIV. S-06-1289 LKK/KJN P (E.D. Cal. Jan. 4, 2013)
Case details for

Nelson v. Runnels

Case Details

Full title:RAYMOND PAUL NELSON, Plaintiff, v. D. L. RUNNELS, et al., Defendants.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Date published: Jan 4, 2013

Citations

NO. CIV. S-06-1289 LKK/KJN P (E.D. Cal. Jan. 4, 2013)