From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Scholz Design, Inc. v. Stingel

United States District Court, W.D. North Carolina, Asheville Division
Mar 25, 2008
CIVIL CASE NO. 1:07cv296 (W.D.N.C. Mar. 25, 2008)

Opinion

CIVIL CASE NO. 1:07cv296.

March 25, 2008


ORDER


THIS MATTER is before the Court on the Motion to Withdraw [Doc. 12] of the law firm of Van Winkle, Buck, Wall, Starnes and Davis, P.A. (The Van Winkle Law Firm). For grounds, the movant states that when Attorney W. Perry Fisher II, first appeared as counsel of record for Defendants, he was a member of the Van Winkle Law Firm. He has since left the Van Winkle Law Firm and has opened his own practice. Mr. Fisher, through his new firm, remains as counsel for Defendants.

It appears to the Court that the above facts constitute good cause to allow the Motion to Withdraw [Doc. 12]. The allowance of this Motion will not affect the pre-trial or trial schedule of this matter. The Court understands that counsel for Plaintiff has been advised and does not object to the relief sought.

Accordingly, for good cause shown, IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED that the Motion to Withdraw [Doc. 12] of Van Winkle Buck Wall Starnes Davis, P.A. is GRANTED, and the firm of Van Winkle Buck Wall Starnes Davis, P.A. is hereby allowed to withdraw as counsel for the Defendants.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Scholz Design, Inc. v. Stingel

United States District Court, W.D. North Carolina, Asheville Division
Mar 25, 2008
CIVIL CASE NO. 1:07cv296 (W.D.N.C. Mar. 25, 2008)
Case details for

Scholz Design, Inc. v. Stingel

Case Details

Full title:SCHOLZ DESIGN, INC., Plaintiff, v. JOHN STINGEL and CAROLINE STINGEL…

Court:United States District Court, W.D. North Carolina, Asheville Division

Date published: Mar 25, 2008

Citations

CIVIL CASE NO. 1:07cv296 (W.D.N.C. Mar. 25, 2008)