Opinion
Civil Action No. 06-cv-00540-WYD-BNB.
May 1, 2007
ORDER
This matter is before me on Defendant Kevin J. Henry's Motion to Stay Further Proceedings [Doc. # 112, filed 4/25/2007] (the "Motion to Stay"). The Motion to Stay is DENIED.
Mr. Henry, who is proceeding pro se, seeks a stay of all proceedings arguing that on of the co-defendants, Metragen Pharmaceuticals, is obligated by contract to provide him with a lawyer to defend this action. Initially, Mr. Henry was represented by the same lawyers that represented Metragen. On October 11, 2006, Mr. Henry's lawyers moved to withdraw, citing irreconcilable differences among the several parties which they represented. On November 6, 2007, the district judge granted the motion, allowing Mr. Henry's lawyers to withdraw, finding:
The motion [to withdraw] further states that attorney Stephen J. Padula has discussed the motion with Defendants Ruth and Henry, advised them to seek alternate counsel, and advised them, pursuant to [D.C.COLO.LCivR] 83.3(D), that they are personally responsible for complying with all court orders and time limitations established by all applicable rules. The Certificate of Service accompanying the motion indicates that a copy of the motion was sent to Defendants Ruth and Henry on October 11, 2006, via First Class Mail. To date, there has been no response to the motion.Order [Doc. # 63, filed 11/6/2007] at pp. 1-2.
Metragen's lawyers subsequently moved to withdraw, and that motion was granted by an order entered April 23, 2007. [Doc. # 111.] Consequently, no defendant in the action currently is represented by counsel.
I express no opinion about Mr. Henry's claim that Metragen is obligated to provide him with a lawyer. Regardless of the merits of that claim, I will not delay the progress of this case indefinitely while two defendants dispute a collateral matter.
Because I find that there is no good cause to continue proceedings in this matter,
IT IS ORDERED that the Motion to Stay is DENIED.