Hunter Bidens lawyer quits in the middle of a paternity hearing

[The Professor]

I couldn't read your link because I will not disable my Ad Blocker for anyone. At any rate your thread title is obviously wrong.

Attorneys cannot “quit”. They must file a motion to withdraw to get the court's permission to be released from their obligation to their client. The courts are not required to grant all such requests and in practice often deny them. Here is how one reputable source explained what really happened in Hunter Biden's case:

LITTLE ROCK (KATV) — Attorneys for Hunter Biden filed a motion Monday to withdraw from a paternity lawsuit filed against him in Arkansas.

Attorney Dustin McDaniel, on behalf of the Little Rock firm McDaniel, Richardson and Calhoun, cited "irreconcilable conflict" in the motion but did not provide further details. The motion also says that Biden's "personal attorney" advised McDaniel's firm that their services were no longer needed.

Hunter Biden's attorneys withdraw from Arkansas child support lawsuit

So he didn't quit, he just withdrew his services.

Glad we cleared that up.

The purpose of my post was to inform everyone that lawyers do not simply quit or withdraw at their own discretion. They must continue representing their clients until the court gives them permission to withdraw (or quit if you prefer). Attorneys must file a motion to withdraw which may or may not be approved by the court. The Title of OP's thread and the article it was based upon seemed to suggest that an attorney could terminate his services at any time for any reason and this is not true.

 

[MAGAman]

The purpose of my post was to inform everyone that lawyers do not simply quit or withdraw at their own discretion. They must continue representing their clients until the court gives them permission to withdraw (or quit if you prefer). Attorneys must file a motion to withdraw which may or may not be approved by the court. The Title of OP's thread and the article it was based upon seemed to suggest that an attorney could terminate his services at any time for any reason and this is not true.

No, the OP did not suggest any attorney can quit for any reason. The OP suggests this specific attorney quit and didn't specify a reason.

Because he quit.

 

[The Professor]

The purpose of my post was to inform everyone that lawyers do not simply quit or withdraw at their own discretion. They must continue representing their clients until the court gives them permission to withdraw (or quit if you prefer). Attorneys must file a motion to withdraw which may or may not be approved by the court. The Title of OP's thread and the article it was based upon seemed to suggest that an attorney could terminate his services at any time for any reason and this is not true.

No, the OP did not suggest any attorney can quit for any reason. The OP suggests this specific attorney quit and didn't specify a reason.

Because he quit.

You said: “The OP suggests this specific attorney quit and didn't specify a reason. Because he quit.” I have a JD (doctorate in law) and what the OP suggested is absurd! However, I cannot condemn him for his belief because he relied on a newspaper article he trusted. Unfortunately, the article grossly misstated the facts and left an erroneous impression that an attorney could quit a case whenever he wanted to. You, on the other hand, read or should have read, my response to this post in which I fully explained that none of Hunter's attorneys quit but instead filed a motion to withdraw which they were legally required to do. For some reason I failed to get my point across across so I will try one last time.

An attorney cannot terminate an attorney-client relationship without first getting permission from the court and this is not debatable. The court will not approve a motion to withdraw without a legitimate reason, and this is also not debatable. The courts often deny such motions for a variety of reasons. Since you may challenge my credentials and my opinion, I will provide a few selected links which hopefully will convince you. The first link is just a general discussion which shows that lawyers must seek permission from the courts to withdraw from a case.

“Ellen Murphy, who teaches professional responsibility at Wake Forest University School of Law, says judges should be able to read between the lines when lawyers seek permission to withdraw and recognize that there could be rule compliance issues, such as conflict of interest or repugnant action by the client. However, “I can imagine facts when a judge would want, and reasonably need, more information,” Murphy says.

“A judge could ask the lawyer whether the motion is brought in good faith and without a dilatory purpose. The opinion explains that a “judge should not require the disclosure of confidential client information without considering whether such information is necessary to reach a sound decision on the motion.”

Lawyers should tread carefully before quitting a troublesome client

The American Bar Association's rules for professional responsibility make it clear that sometimes an attorney may be required to continue representing his client even when the attorney has good cause for terminating his services.

“(c) A lawyer must comply with applicable law requiring notice to or permission of a tribunal when terminating a representation. When ordered to do so by a tribunal, a lawyer shall continue representation notwithstanding good cause for terminating the representation.”

Rule 1.16: Declining or Terminating Representation

There are certain circumstances in which an attorney can no longer lawfully represent a client; however, even then he must get the court's permission to withdraw!

“Even where withdrawal is mandatory, an attorney must first seek and obtain the court's permission before ending representation in the middle of a case. And, in most situations where the withdrawal request is granted, the court will give the client a reasonable amount of time to find new counsel.”

When Can an Attorney Withdraw in the Middle of a Case?

Conclusion: An attorney cannot terminate his obligation to his client without first getting permission from the court. This whole debate started because some reporter published an article which was, at best, disingenuous. There is a danger in relying on a single source, especially when you do not know the source and cannot confirm his/her credibility. In this case, the reporter's knowledge of the law was somewhere between woefully inadequate and completely non-existent. He also lied about the facts. Finally, this is from a link I previously posted proving that Hunter Biden's attorneys did not quit without giving reason, but instead filed a motion to withdraw:

LITTLE ROCK (KATV) — Attorneys for Hunter Biden filed a motion Monday to withdraw from a paternity lawsuit filed against him in Arkansas.

Attorney Dustin McDaniel, on behalf of the Little Rock firm McDaniel, Richardson and Calhoun, cited "irreconcilable conflict" in the motion but did not provide further details. The motion also says that Biden's "personal attorney" advised McDaniel's firm that their services were no longer needed.

Hunter Biden's attorneys withdraw from Arkansas child support lawsuit

Now, to all you fine ladies and gentlemen, I have done my best to explain what the law is and I can do no more. I am done with this thread. Goodnight .