Skip to main content

No. 25-1429October Term 2025Petition Pending

Docket 25-1429October Term 2025 (2025–2026)

Carlos A. Alonso Cano, as Next Friend of His Minor Daughter Jany Leidy Alonso Morejon, et al., Petitioners v. 245 C&C, LLC, et al.

This pending case asks whether lower federal courts improperly allowed the retained lawyer for minor or incapacitated plaintiffs to withdraw after trial without safeguards to protect the plaintiffs’ representation in post-trial and appellate proceedings.

Case status

Current stage
Petition Pending
Latest event
Petition pending
Decision timing
No decision timeline until the Court agrees to hear the case.
Petition PendingNot granted
ArgumentsNot scheduled
Decision ReleasedNot scheduled
What it's about

This pending case asks whether lower federal courts improperly allowed the retained lawyer for minor or incapacitated plaintiffs to withdraw after trial without safeguards to protect the plaintiffs’ representation in post-trial and appellate proceedings. The petitioners argue that this withdrawal violated due process, Rule 17(c)(2), and their access to the federal courts.

Question presented

1. Whether a district court violates the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment by permitting retained counsel to withdraw post-trial without assessing the litigant's prejudice, thereby denying the assistance of counsel during critical post-trial and appellate proceedings? 2. Whether, in an action involving minor or incapacitated plaintiffs, a district court violates Rule 17(c)(2) by allowing counsel to withdraw post-trial without establishing safeguards to ensure the plaintiffs are continuously represented through appeal and further district court proceedings? 3. Whether a federal appellate court violates the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment by affirming an order allowing retained counsel to withdraw post trial, effectively denying the aggrieved person constitutionally adequate representation on appeal? 4. Whether an appellate court violates the Right of Access to Federal Courts by affirming an order that permits retained counsel to withdraw post-trial, leaving minor and incapacitated plaintiffs unrepresented for the entirety of the appeal?

Case path

United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit / Petition pending

Area

Petition for review pending

Briefing

What it's about

The petition asks the Supreme Court to review whether courts may let retained lawyers withdraw after trial without assessing harm to the client. It also raises protections for minor or incapacitated plaintiffs during appeals and later trial-court proceedings.

Argument

A petition for certiorari (the Court's decision whether to hear a case) has been filed, and oral argument has not been scheduled. Petitioners argue that allowing post-trial withdrawal without safeguards can deny adequate representation and court access.

Impact

A minor plaintiff whose lawyer leaves after trial could have to navigate an appeal without representation. The case could clarify what safeguards courts must use before allowing that to happen.

What is at stake in Cano v. 245 C&C?

The case asks whether courts must assess prejudice and provide safeguards before retained counsel withdraws after trial, especially for minors or incapacitated plaintiffs.

Who could be affected if lawyers withdraw after trial?

Minor or incapacitated plaintiffs could be affected if they are left without a lawyer during an appeal or further trial-court proceedings.

What happens next in Cano v. 245 C&C?

The Supreme Court has not scheduled oral argument. The next development could be a scheduling move or a decision on whether to hear the case.

Grounding

Grounding
Primary materials plus reporting.
Note
Best-effort analysis: this explainer relies on a mix of primary materials and trusted secondary sources. Official filings and opinions remain authoritative.
Checked
Sep 2, 2026
Primary materials5
Context reporting2