Rule 102 (Effective until August 17, 2026) Appearance and Withdrawal of Counsel. [Effective until August 17, 2026]
Rule Text
(a) (1) An attorney appears in a case:
(A) By attending any proceeding as counsel for any party;
(B) By permitting the attorney’s name to appear on any pleadings or motions, except that an attorney who assisted in the preparation of a pleading and whose name appears on the pleading as having done so shall not be deemed to have entered an appearance in the matter; or
(C) By a written appearance. Except in a criminal case, a written entry of appearance may be limited, by its terms, to a particular proceeding or matter.
(2) Except as otherwise limited by a written entry of appearance, an appearing attorney shall be considered as representing the party or parties for whom the attorney appears for all purposes.
(b) All pleadings shall contain the name, address and telephone number of counsel or, if pro se, the party. All notices shall be mailed to the address provided. Each party or counsel shall give notice in writing of any change of address to the clerk and other parties.
(c) Counsel will not be permitted to withdraw from a case except upon court order. Except in the case of extraordinary circumstances, the court shall condition withdrawal of counsel upon the substitution of other counsel by written appearance. In the alternative, the court shall allow withdrawal upon a statement submitted by the client acknowledging the withdrawal of counsel for the client, and stating a desire to proceed pro se. An attorney who has entered a limited entry of appearance shall be deemed to have withdrawn when the attorney has fulfilled the duties of the limited entry of appearance.
Amendment history: Amended January 8, 2002, effective April 1, 2002. Court abuses discretion by proceeding without attorney. — The district court abused its discretion when it permitted the husband’s attorney to withdraw at a divorce proceeding which was not attended by the husband, and then immediately proceeded with the trial in the absence of the husband. The husband was entitled to have a new trial, after being given reasonable notice of the trial setting, so that he could appear and defend through his attorney or pro se. Honan v. Honan, 809 P.2d 783, 1991 Wyo. LEXIS 52 (Wyo. 1991). Circumstances permitting withdrawal. — District court did not commit reversible error in allowing a husband’s counsel to withdraw eight business days before trial because counsel’s request to withdraw was based on specific facts that showed the husband’s failure to cooperate and his obstruction of an orderly progression of a divorce action. Byrd v. Mahaffey, 2003 WY 137, 78 P.3d 671, 2003 Wyo. LEXIS 167 (Wyo. 2003). Appearance for all purposes. — Since provision for special appearance to contest jurisdiction no longer exists under Wyoming Rules of Civil Procedure, once respondent’s attorney filed written appearance he appeared for all purposes and could not withdraw without court approval, and since respondent was still represented, service of notice upon that attorney was proper. CRB v. Department of Family Servs., 974 P.2d 931, 1999 Wyo. LEXIS 23 (Wyo. 1999).