From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Flores v. Murphy

United States District Court, Northern District of California
Jul 8, 2022
21-cv-07851-VKD (N.D. Cal. Jul. 8, 2022)

Opinion

21-cv-07851-VKD

07-08-2022

DAVIN WILLIE FLORES, Plaintiff, v. E. MURPHY, et al., Defendants.


ORDER GRANTING WITHDRAWAL OF COUNSEL RE: DKT. NO. 24

VIRGINIA K. DEMARCHI UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Attorney Luke Peters moves for leave to withdraw as counsel for plaintiff Davin Willie Flores. Dkt. No. 24. In this district, “[c]ounsel may not withdraw from an action until relieved by order of the Court after written notice has been provided, reasonably in advance, to the client and to all other parties who have appeared in the case.” Civil L.R. 11-5(a). Counsel has provided notice of his intent to his client, and no other parties have yet appeared in this case. Dkt. No. 24. Concurrent with the motion to withdraw, Mr. Flores has requested additional time to file an amended complaint (Dkt. No. 22) and the Court has granted it (Dkt. No. 23). Mr. Peters' motion for leave is supported by good cause, and thus the Court grants counsel's motion to withdraw.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Flores v. Murphy

United States District Court, Northern District of California
Jul 8, 2022
21-cv-07851-VKD (N.D. Cal. Jul. 8, 2022)
Case details for

Flores v. Murphy

Case Details

Full title:DAVIN WILLIE FLORES, Plaintiff, v. E. MURPHY, et al., Defendants.

Court:United States District Court, Northern District of California

Date published: Jul 8, 2022

Citations

21-cv-07851-VKD (N.D. Cal. Jul. 8, 2022)