Gillie v. Boulas

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that four months’ time to obtain new counsel and prepare for trial made deficient Rule 10 withdrawal harmless
• noting that the withdrawal motion failed to address the party’s right to object and failed to state all pending deadlines and settings
• holding trial court abuses its discretion when it grants motion to withdraw that does not comply with Rule 10’s requirements
• continuance of nearly four months sufficient to render erroneous withdrawal harmless

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).