From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Preston v. City of Oakland

United States District Court, Ninth Circuit, California, N.D. California, San Francisco Division
Aug 8, 2014
3:14-cv-2022 NC (N.D. Cal. Aug. 8, 2014)

Opinion

          Celia M. Ruiz, Janice L. Sperow, Forrest E. Fang, RUIZ & SPEROW, LLP, Emeryville, CA, Attorneys for Defendants CITY OF OAKLAND and DEANNA SANTANA.

          OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY, CITY OF OAKLAND, James Hodgkins, Attorneys for Defendants, City of Oakland and Deanna Santana.


          NOTICE OF WITHDRAWAL AND SUBSTITUTION OF COUNSEL AND [PROPOSED] ORDER

          NATHANAEL COUSINS, Magistrate Judge.

         TO ALL PARTIES AND TO THEIR ATTORNEYS OF RECORD AND TO THE CLERK OF THE COURT:

         PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that pursuant to Civil Local Rule 11-5 and with the consent of their clients the City of Oakland and Deanna Santana, Celia M. Ruiz, Janice L. Sperow and Forrest E. Fang from the law firm of Ruiz & Sperow, LLP, 2200 Powell Street, Ste. 350, Emeryville, CA 94608 are withdrawing as counsel of record for Defendants City of Oakland and Deanna Santana in this matter.

         Celia M. Ruiz, Janice L. Sperow and Forrest E. Fang will be replaced as counsel of record for the City of Oakland and Ms. Santana by James Hodgkins (SBN 142561), Maria Bee (SBN 167716) and Otis McGee, Jr. (SBN 71885) of the Office of the City Attorney for the City of Oakland.

         The City of Oakland and Deanna Santana consent to this withdrawal of their counsel and to the substitution of the Office of the City Attorney for the City of Oakland as their counsel of record in this matter as set forth above.

         It is hereby requested that, effective immediately, all further pleadings, notices, and correspondence be directed to Mr. Hodgkins' attention at the address below.

         Substitution Based on Consent

         Defendants the City of Oakland and Deanna Santana respectfully submit that the proposed substitution of counsel is in the interest of justice and is not made for purposes of delay or any other improper purpose. The undersigned consent to the above substitution of counsel.


Summaries of

Preston v. City of Oakland

United States District Court, Ninth Circuit, California, N.D. California, San Francisco Division
Aug 8, 2014
3:14-cv-2022 NC (N.D. Cal. Aug. 8, 2014)
Case details for

Preston v. City of Oakland

Case Details

Full title:DARYELLE LAWANNA PRESTON, Plaintiff, v. CITY OF OAKLAND; DEANNA SANTANA…

Court:United States District Court, Ninth Circuit, California, N.D. California, San Francisco Division

Date published: Aug 8, 2014

Citations

3:14-cv-2022 NC (N.D. Cal. Aug. 8, 2014)