Filed: Jun. 02, 2016
Latest Update: Jun. 02, 2016
Summary: ORDER CAROLYN K. DELANEY , Magistrate Judge . Plaintiff is a state prisoner seeking relief pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 1983. On March 14, 2016, plaintiff was appointed a pro bono attorney, Brian Pomerantz, to represent him in this matter. 1 (ECF No. 104.) Since then, plaintiff has filed several pro se motions. (ECF Nos. 107, 113, 118, 119, 116 & 117; see also ECF No. 120.) Mr. Pomerantz recently filed a motion to withdraw as plaintiff's attorney. (ECF No. 115.) The court has yet to rule on
Summary: ORDER CAROLYN K. DELANEY , Magistrate Judge . Plaintiff is a state prisoner seeking relief pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 1983. On March 14, 2016, plaintiff was appointed a pro bono attorney, Brian Pomerantz, to represent him in this matter. 1 (ECF No. 104.) Since then, plaintiff has filed several pro se motions. (ECF Nos. 107, 113, 118, 119, 116 & 117; see also ECF No. 120.) Mr. Pomerantz recently filed a motion to withdraw as plaintiff's attorney. (ECF No. 115.) The court has yet to rule on t..
More
ORDER
CAROLYN K. DELANEY, Magistrate Judge.
Plaintiff is a state prisoner seeking relief pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On March 14, 2016, plaintiff was appointed a pro bono attorney, Brian Pomerantz, to represent him in this matter.1 (ECF No. 104.) Since then, plaintiff has filed several pro se motions. (ECF Nos. 107, 113, 118, 119, 116 & 117; see also ECF No. 120.)
Mr. Pomerantz recently filed a motion to withdraw as plaintiff's attorney. (ECF No. 115.) The court has yet to rule on that motion and, to date, plaintiff continues to be represented by counsel. See L.R. 182(d) ("The authority and duty of the attorney of record shall continue until relieved by order of the Court issued hereunder.") Thus the court will disregard plaintiff's unauthorized pro se filings. Specifically, the court will deny plaintiff's motions without prejudice to renewal, either through counsel or at such time as plaintiff is proceeding pro se. Any outstanding issues can be addressed at the July 6, 2016 status conference.
In accordance with the above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff's pro se motions (ECF Nos. 107, 113, 118, 119, 116 & 117) are denied without prejudice to renewal.
FootNotes
1. See also Davis v. Walker, et al., No. 2:08-cv-0593 KJM CKD.
