2017-00206453-CU-PO

People of the State of California vs. Jack McGuire

Nature of Proceeding: Motion to Withdraw as Counsel

Filed By: Murray, Todd A.

Defendant Margaret McGuire’s counsel’s motion to withdraw as counsel is denied without prejudice.

Like the American Bar Association rules, the California rules emphasize the attorney’s obligation to withdraw when necessary to avoid illegal or improper conduct, and the importance of avoiding, to the extent possible, prejudice to the client’s interests.

The rules have been liberally construed to protect clients. (See Vann v. Shilleh (1975) 54 Cal.App.3d 192, 197; Ramirez v. Sturdevant (1994) 21 Cal.App.4th 904, 915 (under Code of Civil Procedure section 284, an attorney, either with the client’s consent or the court’s approval, may withdraw from a case when withdrawal may be accomplished without undue prejudice to the client’s interests).)

The right of counsel to withdraw from pending litigation is not absolute. (Vann, supra, 54 Cal.App.3d at 197.) Rule 3-700 of the Professional Rules of Conduct provides: “A

member shall not withdraw from employment until the member has taken reasonable steps to avoid reasonably foreseeable prejudice to the rights of the client, including giving due notice to the client, allowing time for employment of other counsel, complying with rule 3-700(D) [release of client’s papers], and complying with applicable laws and rules.”

The Court finds that granting the motion to withdraw without securing replacement counsel would be prejudicial to the client. This is especially true as there are two hearings set for April 25, 2018 in this case, both of which may materially affect Mrs. McGuire and her property..