Whiting v. Lacara - 187 F.3d 317 (2d Cir. 1999)

Rule:

Rule 1.4 of the Civil Rules of the United States District Court for the Southern and Eastern Districts of New York provides that an attorney who has appeared as attorney of record for a party may be relieved or displaced only by order of the court and may not withdraw from a case without leave of the court granted by order. Such an order may be granted only upon a showing by affidavit or otherwise of satisfactory reasons for withdrawal or displacement and the posture of the case, including its position, if any, on the calendar.

Facts:

The Appellee Joseph M. Whiting brought an action based upon his termination from the police department and, after his first attorney was replaced and his second attorney withdrew, the appellee hired Appellant Garrett Lacara to pursue his claims. Upon the appellee's refusal to heed the advice of the appellant concerning the nature of his claims and management of the case, the appellant sought to withdraw immediately prior to trial. The district court denied appellant’s motion, and the appellant challenged the decision. 

Issue:

Under the circumstances, should the appellant be allowed to withdraw as appellee’s counsel? 

Answer:

Yes.

Conclusion:

After finding that the court had appellate jurisdiction under the collateral order exception, the court noted that the appellee was cooperative and the fact that appellant was the third attorney was notice that the appellee was a difficult client. However, the appellee’s stated intention to dictate legal strategies and to sue counsel if those strategies were not followed was tantamount to a choice between exposure to a malpractice action or to potential sanctions for unethical conduct. This functional conflict of interest justified withdrawal.