From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Hardesty v. Sacramento Metro. Air Quality Mgmt. Dist.

United States District Court, Eastern District of California
Aug 24, 2023
2:10-cv-02414-KJM-KJN (E.D. Cal. Aug. 24, 2023)

Opinion

2:10-cv-02414-KJM-KJN 2:12-cv-02457-KJM-KJN

08-24-2023

Joseph Hardesty et al., Plaintiffs, v. Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District et al., Defendants.


ORDER

On August 15, 2023, plaintiff Jay Schneider filed a declaration in opposition to defendant County of Sacramento's motion to enforce the settlement agreement between defendant and the Schneider plaintiffs. Schneider Decl., ECF No. 722. Litigants represented by counsel may not file documents on their own behalf. United States v. Mendez, No. 11-00356, 2023 WL 2058890, at *2 (E.D. Cal. Feb. 16, 2023). Mr. Schneider declares this filing was necessary because his attorney refused to file an opposition on behalf of him and his wife (co-plaintiff, Susan Schneider). Schneider Decl. ¶¶ 8-9. Under this district's local rules, “an attorney who has appeared may not withdraw leaving the client in propria persona without leave of court upon noticed motion and notice to the client and all other parties who have appeared.” E.D. Cal. L.R. 182(d). Mr. Schneider's counsel has not moved for leave to withdraw. Until Mr. Schneider's counsel properly seeks to withdraw or substitute counsel in accordance with the Local Rules and other applicable rules, Glenn W. Peterson and Richard Manning Ross are Mr. Schneider's counsel.

Within seven (7) days plaintiffs' counsel Glenn W. Peterson and Richard Manning Ross are directed to notify the court regarding the status of their representation of plaintiffs Jay and Susan Schneider. If they no longer represent plaintiffs in this matter, both attorneys are ordered to show cause as to why they should not be sanctioned for withdrawing without leave of court. Additionally, counsel for the parties are hereby directed to meet and confer and notify the court within fourteen (14) days whether the briefing schedule for the pending motion should be modified in order for plaintiffs Jay Schneider and Susan Schneider to file an opposition and whether the hearing as to the pending motion should be continued to a later date.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Hardesty v. Sacramento Metro. Air Quality Mgmt. Dist.

United States District Court, Eastern District of California
Aug 24, 2023
2:10-cv-02414-KJM-KJN (E.D. Cal. Aug. 24, 2023)
Case details for

Hardesty v. Sacramento Metro. Air Quality Mgmt. Dist.

Case Details

Full title:Joseph Hardesty et al., Plaintiffs, v. Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality…

Court:United States District Court, Eastern District of California

Date published: Aug 24, 2023

Citations

2:10-cv-02414-KJM-KJN (E.D. Cal. Aug. 24, 2023)