Estate of Falco

In Estate of Falco (1987) 188 Cal. App. 3d 1004, the appellate court addressed the question of an attorney's right to a quantum meruit recovery of fees after the attorney voluntarily withdraws from a case and the case is subsequently settled. Although the court did "not intend our opinion to apply to a related but different question regarding the circumstances in which an attorney has a right to withdraw from a case," ( id. at p. 1007) it observed: "To protect the best interests of the client, a trial court should have broad discretion in allowing attorneys to withdraw. In the case at bar, the court granted appellants' motion to withdraw on the basis that the relationship between the parties had completely broken down. It was not relevant who caused the breakdown for the purposes of determining whether appellants should be allowed to withdraw, but rather, the trial court's concern focused on the effects the rift would have on respondents' legal representation. "While a personality clash between the parties may provide good reason for allowing the attorney to withdraw, it is not necessarily a justifiable reason for purposes of awarding fees." ( Id. at pp. 1014-1015.)