Lopez v. Lee

Summary

The United States District Court for the Northern District of California granted Deputy Attorney General Ruhparwar’s request to withdraw as counsel for defendant Cross in a prisoner civil rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The court denied plaintiff’s requests for entry of default and default judgment because the Clerk had not entered default, denied as moot the request to serve Cross with notices concerning default judgment, and denied plaintiff’s motion to strike the opposition to default judgment.

Holdings

1. Counsel had good cause to withdraw because defendant Cross completely refused to communicate with counsel, and counsel provided the notice and took the reasonable steps required to avoid reasonably foreseeable prejudice to Cross.
2. A motion for default judgment is improper unless the Clerk has first entered default against the defendant.
3. The court declined to strike the opposition because plaintiff did not show that it was redundant, immaterial, impertinent, or scandalous, and counsel properly opposed the default-judgment request while still representing Cross.

Questions Presented

1. Whether counsel and the California Attorney General's Office had good cause to withdraw from representing defendant Cross.
2. Whether plaintiff could obtain default judgment against Cross when the Clerk had not entered default.
3. Whether the court should strike the opposition to plaintiff's default-judgment request under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(f).
4. Whether plaintiff's request that the court serve Cross with notices concerning entry of default and default judgment was moot.

Disposition

other