Reigo Securitization Sponsor 2021-1, LLC v Northwind Fin. Corp.

Supreme Court, New York County

Decided on July 2, 2026

Index No. 651686/2023

Robert R. Reed, J.

The following e-filed documents, listed by NYSCEF document number (Motion 008) 148, 149, 150, 151, 152, 153, 154, 155, 156, 157, 158, 159, 160, 161, 162, 163, 164, 165 were read on this motion to/for ATTORNEY -DISQUALIFY/RELIEVE/SUBSTITUTE/WITHDRAW.

In motion sequence 008, attorney Bernard V. Kleinman of the Law Office of Bernard V. [*2]Kleinman, PLLC, attorney of record for defendant Gifford Chip Cummings, moves to be relieved as counsel.

Movant submits an affirmation, dated February 24, 2026, in which he states that withdrawal of his representation of defendant is warranted due to a breakdown of the attorney/client relationship (NYSCEF doc. no. 149). The breakdown, he asserts, stems from the nonpayment of fees, an overall failure in communication, and, pointedly, his receipt of an email from his client stating flatly: "[y]ou are hereby fired and no longer authorized to represent me or my interests in any form or capacity" (NYSCEF doc. no. 162).

Movant does not request that a stay be imposed in this action.

CPLR 321 (b) (2) provides:

"[a]n attorney of record may withdraw or be changed by order of the court in which the action is pending, upon motion on such notice to the client of the withdrawing attorney, to the attorneys of all other parties in the action or, if a party appears without an attorney, to the party, and to any other person, as the court may direct."

If an attorney finds it necessary to end the attorney-client relationship without the consent of the client, the attorney may move on such notice as may be directed by the court, to be relieved as counsel by court order (Farage v Ehrenberg, 124 AD3d 159 [2nd Dept 2014]). "The decision to grant or deny permission for counsel to withdraw lies within the discretion of the trial court, and the court's decision should not be overturned absent a showing of an improvident exercise of discretion" (Applebaum v Einstein, 163 AD3d 905, 907 [1st Dept 2018]). Here, attorney Kleinman submits sufficient evidence, by way of attorney affirmation, of a breakdown in the attorney-client relationship sufficient to warrant withdrawal. A party's failure to pay fees and communicate and cooperate with its attorney are sufficient grounds to grant leave to withdraw (id.). Of special note here is the fact that movant presents documentary evidence of his then-client expressly terminating movant's services.

A stay of an action following an attorney withdrawal is only automatic under CPLR 321(c) on account of the death, removal or disability of an attorney (Transasia Commodities Inv. Ltd., NewLead JMEG, LLC, 169 AD3d 591, 592 [1st Dept 2019]). A court may decline to impose a stay where the court determines from the conduct of the parties that there has been a demonstrated pattern of willful noncompliance with court orders and a pattern of intentional delay of the litigation process (id.).

In this case, there has been no evidence of undue delay, or willful or contumacious conduct by defendant. Rather, there is only evidence to substantiate defendant's apparent inability and/or unwillingness to pay legal fees. The court's imposition of a stay is warranted under these circumstances.

Accordingly, it is hereby

ORDERED that the motion of Bernard V. Kleinman of the Law Office of Bernard V. Kleinman, PLLC, (motion seq. no. 008) to be relieved as counsel for defendant Gifford Chip Cummings is granted, without opposition, upon filing of proof of compliance with the following conditions; and it is further

ORDERED that movant serve a copy of this order with notice of entry upon defendant Gifford Chip Cummings, the former client, at his last known addresses by certified mail and in accordance with the rules governing service of inmates at FCI Terra Haute in Terra Haute, IN, return receipt requested, and upon the attorneys for all other parties appearing herein by filing on the New York State Courts Electronic Filing System, as both by not later than July 10, 2026; and [*3]it is further

ORDERED that, together with the copy of this order with notice of entry served upon the former client, moving counsel shall forward a notice directing the former client to appoint a substitute attorney within 30 days from the date of the mailing of the notice and the client shall comply therewith, except that, in the event that defendant Gifford Chip Cummings intends instead to represent himself, he shall notify the Clerk of Part 43 of this decision in writing within said 30-day period; and it is further

ORDERED that any new attorney retained by defendant Gifford Chip Cummings shall file a notice of appearance with the Clerk of the General Clerk's Office and the Clerk of the Part within 30 days from the date the notice to retain new counsel is mailed; and it is further

ORDERED that no further proceedings may be taken against the former client without leave of this court for a period of 30 days after service on the former client of the aforesaid notice to appoint a substitute attorney; and it is further

ORDERED that the filing of a notice of appearance as provided above with the Clerk of the General Clerk's Office shall be made in accordance with the procedures set forth in the Protocol on Courthouse and County Clerk Procedures for Electronically Filed Cases (accessible at the "E-Filing" page on the court's website); and it is further

ORDERED that all parties shall appear for a virtual status conference on August 18, 2026, at 11:00 a.m.

DATE July 2, 2026

ROBERT R. REED, J.S.C.