S. Ct. Civ. No. 2014-0033

Considering appeals from Superior Court orders denying a petition for guardianship brought by the respondent's sons, seeking guardianship and conservatorship over their father, and denying their counsel's request to withdraw due to a disagreement as to legal fees, because the father filed for bankruptcy before the Superior Court entered its final order, and the automatic stay imposed as a result of that filing by operation of 11 U.S.C. § 362 had not been lifted at that time, the Superior Court's order denying the petition for guardianship was void. That case is remanded to the Superior Court to resume the proceedings after termination of the father's bankruptcy case or the lifting of the automatic stay by the bankruptcy court, whichever comes first. However, the Superior Court correctly determined that permitting the sons' counsel to withdraw would cause prejudicial delay to both parties, given the substantially completed proceedings and the fact that they needed only to file post-hearing motions. Thus, the Superior Court's order in that case is affirmed.