New York State Court of Claims

New York State Court of Claims
RAMIREZ v. THE STATE OF NEW YORK, # 2010-010-019, Claim No. 115857, Motion No. M-77613

Synopsis

Unopposed motion to be relieved as counsel granted.

Case information

UID: 2010-010-019
Claimant(s): ELIA RAMIREZ
Claimant short name: RAMIREZ
Footnote (claimant name) :
Defendant(s): THE STATE OF NEW YORK
Footnote (defendant name) :
Third-party claimant(s):
Third-party defendant(s):
Claim number(s): 115857
Motion number(s): M-77613
Cross-motion number(s):
Judge: Terry Jane Ruderman
Claimant's attorney: FERRO, KUBA, MANGANO, SKLYAR, P.C.
By: Michael N. Manolakis, Esq.
Defendant's attorney: HON. ANDREW M. CUOMO
Attorney General for the State of New York
By: Rachel Zaffrann, Assistant Attorney General
Third-party defendant's attorney:
Signature date: March 2, 2010
City: White Plains
Comments:
Official citation:
Appellate results:
See also (multicaptioned case)

Decision

The following papers were read and considered by the Court on the unopposed motion of claimant's attorney, the law firm of Ferro, Kuba, Mangano, Sklyar, P.C., to be relieved as counsel for claimant regarding Claim No. 115857:

Order to Show Cause, Attorney's Supporting Affirmation and Exhibits

The Rules of Professional Conduct provide that a lawyer may withdraw from representing a client if the client "fails to cooperate in the representation or otherwise renders the representation unreasonably difficult for the lawyer to carry out employment effectively" (Rule 1.16[c][7]). On a motion to withdraw as counsel, the movant must demonstrate reasonable notice to the client and good and sufficient cause for the withdrawal (see Willis v Holder, 43 AD3d 1441, J.M. Heinike Assoc. v Liberty Natl. Bank, 142 AD2d 929; Johns-Manville Sales Corp. v State Univ. Constr. Fund, 79 AD2d 782).

According to the affirmation of claimant's counsel, Michael N. Manolakis, after numerous attempts were made to contact claimant by telephone, a letter was sent to claimant's home on October 29, 2009 seeking her cooperation with the prosecution of this claim (Ex. 6). Claimant has not responded to the telephone calls or the correspondence. Accordingly, the law firm seeks an order permitting its withdrawal from this matter.

The application is hereby GRANTED. Prosecution of Claim No. 115857 is stayed for sixty days from the filing of this Decision and Order to permit claimant to retain new counsel. If by that time an appearance of counsel has not been filed, claimant will be deemed to appear pro se. Claimant is reminded that she is required to inform the Clerk of the Court in Albany, in writing, of any change in address.

Additionally, a preliminary conference on this claim is scheduled for June 28, 2010 at 10:00 a.m. at the Court of Claims, 140 Grand Street, Suite 507, White Plains where claimant (either by counsel or pro se) and defendant's attorney shall appear in person. Should claimant or her attorney fail to appear for the scheduled preliminary conference, this Court will dismiss the claim (22 NYCRR 206.10[g]).

It is further ordered that, within fourteen days of the filing of this Decision and Order, the law firm is directed to file an affidavit with the Chief Clerk's office indicating that service of a copy of this Decision and Order was made upon claimant by certified mail, return receipt requested and by ordinary mail to claimant's last known address and that claimant's file has been turned over to her.

March 2, 2010

White Plains, New York

Terry Jane Ruderman

Judge of the Court of Claims