Breaking News – DENIED: Forensic Counsel’s Motion to Withdraw representation in Rigsby Qui Tam

“Beats all!” – short for “beats all I’ve ever seen” – applies to the situation and not Judge Walker’s decision as he clearly made the only lawful call possible.  Motions to withdraw are fairly common and hardly newsworthy.  However, when the withdrawing counsel was a party’s entire legal team and there is no corresponding notice of appearance filed by another attorney, the news value increases.

Laurel, Mississippi attorney Robert Gholson, the apparently- eager-to-withdraw but honorable counsel representing Rigsby qui tam defendant Forensic Analysis Engineering Corporation (FAEC), as the “new kid on the block” in a November 22, 2008, update on the case published just week’s after Gohlson’s November 6th Notice of Appearance.

Counsel of Record for FAEC in McIntosh v State Farm

My quick review of the Rigsby docket found no indication of prior representation for FAEC; however, most, if not all, other defendants had counsel of record shortly by April and the Rigsbys’ had new counsel in place in early August.  Since FAEC had also been a defendant in McIntosh v State Farm, I went to that docket and confirmed the Company’s counsel in McIntosh represents Haag Engineering in the qui tam case.

According to Judge Walker’s Order denying Gohlson’s Motion to Withdraw Gholson Burson Entrekin & Orr, P.A from the case,

In support of the motion, Gholson and…[and Associate]…Wallace indicate that professional considerations require termination of the attorney-client relationship but that ethical considerations prevent counsel from disclosing the specific factual grounds for the requested withdrawal.

There is certainly nothing but logic to suggest those “professional considerations” and “ethical grounds” indicate Gohlson learned the horse he was riding was no longer a horse with no name. If you need more clues Continue reading “Breaking News – DENIED: Forensic Counsel’s Motion to Withdraw representation in Rigsby Qui Tam”