From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

North Smithfield v. Susan Marie Builders

Supreme Court of Rhode Island
Nov 15, 1991
599 A.2d 319 (R.I. 1991)

Opinion

No. 90-583-A.

November 15, 1991.

Appeal from the Superior Court, Providence County, Needham, J.

Michael D. Mitchell, Adler, Pollock Sheehan, Providence, for intervenor.

Michael A. Kelly, Adler, Pollock Sheehan, Providence, for defendant.


ORDER

This case came before this court on November 6, 1991, pursuant to an order directing both parties to appear before this court and show cause why the issues raised in this appeal should not be summarily decided.

After hearing the arguments of counsel and examining the memoranda filed by the parties, we conclude that the trial justice should have granted Adler, Pollock Sheehan's motion to withdraw. In a civil action at a noncritical stage of the proceedings, a corporation that wants to litigate and prosecute its action cannot do so at the expense of the law firm representing it. Imposing such a financial burden on the law firm to maintain continued representation is improper. The decision of the trial justice is reversed, and this case is remanded to the trial court for proceedings in accordance with this order.

The appeal of the defendant's attorney is therefore sustained.


Summaries of

North Smithfield v. Susan Marie Builders

Supreme Court of Rhode Island
Nov 15, 1991
599 A.2d 319 (R.I. 1991)
Case details for

North Smithfield v. Susan Marie Builders

Case Details

Full title:TOWN OF NORTH SMITHFIELD v. SUSAN MARIE BUILDERS, INC

Court:Supreme Court of Rhode Island

Date published: Nov 15, 1991

Citations

599 A.2d 319 (R.I. 1991)

Citing Cases

King v. Naiad Inflatables of Newport, Inc.

When the motion to withdraw is advanced in the context of "a civil action at a noncritical stage of the…

Silva v. Perkins Mach. Co.

"In a civil action at a noncritical stage of the proceedings, a corporation that wants to litigate and…