Opinion
Civil Action No. 06-cv-02575-MSK-KMT.
October 1, 2008
ORDER
This matter is before the court on "Respondents' Counsel's Motion to Withdraw and Supporting Brief" [Doc. No. 89, filed July 8, 2008]. On July 9, 2008, "Petitioner's Response to Dorsey Whitney's Motion to Withdraw as Respondents' Counsel" [Doc. No. 92] was filed. On the same date, "Respondents' Counsel's Supplement to Motion to Withdraw" [Doc. No. 93] was filed, and on July 14, 2008 counsel for Respondents also filed an "Affidavit in Support of Motion to Withdraw." [Doc. No. 95]. On August 18, 2008, counsel for Respondents filed a "Supplement to Motion to Withdraw" [Doc. No. 97] advising the law firm's files in this matter had been sent to the law firm of Marcus Auerbach LLC, 400 Greenwood Avenue, Suite 200, Wyncote, PA 19095. The court notes there has been no entry of appearance or request for substitution of counsel filed on behalf of Sokol Holdings, Inc., Frontier Mining, Ltd., Brian C. Savage and Thomas Sinclair (hereinafter "Respondents").
Dorsey Whitney claims that their firm has provided substantial services at the request of the Respondents for which they provided detailed invoices describing the services and costs incurred by the firm. Stephen Bell, a senior partner of Dorsey Whitney, claims the Respondents have disputed the charges for these services and have refused to pay for said services. (Doc. No. 95, ¶¶ 4-5). Mr. Bell advises the Respondents have sued the law firm in Delaware state court alleging breach of fiduciary duty and negligence with respect to the representation by Dorsey Whitney of the Respondents in this Colorado federal case. ( Id. at ¶¶ 8 and 9). Mr. Bell claims the attorney-client relationship is substantially and, apparently irretrievably, broken. ( Id.) This court must reluctantly agree.
The court notes that the case was closed by Order of District Court Judge Marcia S. Krieger on May 15, 2008. [Doc. No. 85]. The only pending matter is "Respondents' Motion for Reconsideration of the May 15, 2008 Order Affirming Orders of the Magistrate Judge" [Doc. No. 86]. That motion, filed by Dorsey Whitney on behalf of the Respondents, appears to be fully briefed and awaiting ruling by the District Court. This court is concerned about leaving the Respondents unrepresented in this court, especially since two of the Respondents are business entities who cannot appear pro se. However, the status of the case and the fact that the Respondents are now adversaries against their attorneys in a state court matter, strongly indicate that the law firm of Dorsey Whitney, can no longer represent the Respondents' best interests in this case.
Wherefore, it is ORDERED
Respondents' Counsel's Motion to Withdraw [Doc. No. 89] is GRANTED.