Grandpre v. Gusman et al

1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA
PETER A. GRANDPRE
VERSUS
MARLIN GUSMAN ET AL.
CIVIL ACTION
NO. 22-1923
DIVISION (3)
ORDER AND REASONS
Before the Court is Plaintiff’s Ex Parte Motion to Withdraw Timothy B. Holder
as Attorney by Peter A. Grandpre (R. Doc. 78). The motion is denied for the following
reasons.
“An attorney may withdraw from representation only upon leave of the court
and a showing of good cause and reasonable notice to the client.” Matter of Wynn, 889
F.2d 644, 646 (5th Cir. 1989). “The matter of attorney withdrawal is entrusted to the
sound discretion of the court and will be overturned on appeal only for an abuse of
that discretion.” Gowdy v. Marine Spill Response Corp., 925 F.3d 200, 204 (5th Cir.
2019) (internal citations and quotations omitted). It is incumbent on the court to
assure that the prosecution of the lawsuit before it is not disrupted by the withdrawal
of counsel, and that the withdrawal of counsel is for good cause. Broughten v. Voss,
634 F.2d 880, 882–83 (5th Cir. 1981) (internal citations omitted).
Local Rule 83.2.11 provides for the procedure to withdraw:
Counsel of record may obtain permission only upon joint motion (of
current counsel of record and new counsel of record) to substitute
counsel or upon a written motion served on opposing counsel and the
client. 	If 	other 	counsel 	is 	not 	thereby 	substituted, 	the 	motion 	to
withdraw must contain the present address of the client and the client’s
Case 2:22-cv-01923-EJD Document 80 Filed 01/28/26 Page 1 of 3

2
telephone number if the client can be reached by telephone. The motion
must be accompanied by a certificate of service, including a statement
that the client has been notified of all deadlines and pending court
appearances, served on both the client by certified mail and opposing
counsel, or an affidavit stating why service has not been made.
The Eastern District of Louisiana adopts the Rules of Professional Conduct of the
Louisiana State Bar Association. See LR 83.2.3. Pursuant to Louisiana Rule of
Professional Conduct 1.1.16(b), a lawyer may withdraw from representing a client if
withdrawal can be accomplished without material adverse effect on the interests of
the client.
Plaintiff’s motion to withdraw does not comply with the Local Rules. In his
motion, Plaintiff fails to substitute counsel, attach a certificate of service on Peter A.
Grandpre and opposing counsel, or include an affidavit stating why service has not
been made.1 Moreover, withdrawing at this late stage of litigation could
prejudice Plaintiff. The pretrial conference is less than two weeks away2 and the jury
trial is less than six weeks away.3
Plaintiff’s counsel cites a fundamental difference in how to proceed in the
defense of the matter as good cause to withdraw.4 But Plaintiff is not defending the
case. Thus, Plaintiff’s counsel’s argument that there is good cause to withdraw fails.
Moreover, there has been no showing of reasonable notice—particularly given
1 R. Doc. 78.
2 R. Docs. 61, 78.
3 Id.
4 R. Doc. 78 at 1.
Case 2:22-cv-01923-EJD Document 80 Filed 01/28/26 Page 2 of 3

3
counsel’s failure to comply with the Local Rules, the age of the litigation, and the
nearness of the trial date.
Accordingly,
IT IS ORDERED that the Motion (R. Doc. 78) is DENIED.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff’s counsel Timothy B. Holden
appear by telephone for the settlement conference before the Honorable Michael B.
North on February 4, 2026, at 10:00 a.m.
New Orleans, Louisiana, this 28 th day of January, 2026.
EVA J. DOSSIER
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Case 2:22-cv-01923-EJD Document 80 Filed 01/28/26 Page 3 of 3