I was a Pro Se divorcee in Texas, and then got an attorney on as Lead Counsel (poor choice).
We both signed an Agreed Order to Withdraw Counsel. The Judge would not sign it, and said Opposing Counsel has to consent to it first before she (Judge) signs it. So a hearing was set on that "agreed" order and this I believe was dilatory, intentionally by the Judge.
That does not sound right. Is that true that an Agreed Order to Withdraw Counsel needs Opposing Counsel's consent? If so, which section of which Texas statute mandates this?
FYI, this Judge has a personal bias against me, but it's one of those tidbits that you know... but cannot prove.
I know it sounds "strange", but I had the same thing happen to me and I'm an attorney.
A Harris County judge made me get opposing counsel sign a Order to Withdraw as Counsel when a client "fired" me as their attorney because they no longer wanted me to represent them in their legal matter. One possible reason was to make sure that the opposing attorney knew that the other side no longer had legal representation and was now pro se.
Anyway, if the Judge requires it, then it has to be done.
FYI: The judge "liked" me...but I cannot prove it.
A trial Court has considerable discretion in matters such as this. However, the Court has no power to force you to continue with this attorney as your counsel, as you have a right to terminate your attorney at any time.
My thought is that the Court wants to make sure that (1) you really do consent to the withdrawal; (2) you are apprised of your rights and duties; and (3) the opposing counsel is aware that your attorney is leaving the case.
Be aware that some judges will not sign ANY order unless it is agreed to by all counsel, or a hearing has been conducted.
An "Agreed" order means that both sides’ counsel have consented, not the attorney and client. Your attorney needs only to set it for a hearing and it will be done.
This is not biased or dilatory; it's required unless the opposing counsel has already signed off on the order.
