Kelly v. Combs: Court Lets Sher Tremonte Withdraw as Combs’s Counsel and Grants a Retaining Lien
S.D.N.Y. · Case No. 1:24-cv-08024 · Memorandum Opinion and Order Filed Oct. 13, 2026
In the matter of Kelly v. Combs, Case No. 1:24-cv-08024 (S.D.N.Y.), Judge Valerie Caproni has granted a motion by Sher Tremonte LLP to withdraw as counsel for Sean “Diddy” Combs, and has granted the firm a retaining lien over its client’s papers. The court did not set the amount of the lien. The Oct. 13 order directs the clerk to terminate four Sher Tremonte lawyers as Combs’s attorneys of record. (ECF No. 92 at 4.)
Background
Plaintiff Shante Kelly alleges that Combs drugged and raped her at a party in December 2022. She sues under New York City’s Victims of Gender-Motivated Violence Protection Act. (ECF No. 83 at 1.) On Aug. 5, 2026, the court dismissed the claims against the corporate defendants with prejudice and let the claim against Combs go forward. That ruling tested only whether the complaint states a claim, and it accepted the plaintiff’s allegations as true for that purpose. (Id. at 9.) On Aug. 20, the court also terminated Bad Boy Entertainment Holdings, Inc. and Bad Boy Productions Holdings, Inc. as parties. (ECF No. 86.)
The Application
Sher Tremonte moved on Sept. 23, 2026, for leave to withdraw and for a retaining lien under Local Civil Rule 1.4. (ECF No. 92 at 1.) According to the court’s account of the firm’s declaration, the firm gave two reasons. The first is that “Mr. Combs has not paid a substantial balance of attorney’s fees, costs, and expenses.” The second is that its representation “has been rendered unreasonably difficult by Mr. Comb’s lack of cooperation and communications, resulting in a breakdown in the attorney-client relationship.” (Id.)
The order recites further statements from the declaration: that Combs “has not paid Sher Tremonte anything for over six months,” that his last payment covered fees and expenses incurred in late 2025, and that he “has declined to make himself available for timely, substantive, and direct communications about his cases for over four months.” The firm also said it warned Combs, by mail and through his power of attorney, that it would seek to withdraw unless it was paid and he made himself available. (Id. at 1–2.) The motion was served on counsel by ECF and on Combs by email to his power of attorney and by Priority Mail to FCI Fort Dix. The court noted that it “has not received an opposition.” (Id. at 2.)
The Ruling
The court weighed the reasons for withdrawal and the effect on the schedule. It wrote that courts in this circuit have found “satisfactory reasons” in a client’s failure to pay fees and lack of cooperation, and that the Second Circuit has held deliberately disregarding legal fees “may constitute ‘good cause’ to withdraw.” Based on the declaration, it found “that the attorney-client relationship has indeed broken down here sufficient to warrant granting the motion to withdraw.” (Id. at 2–3.)
On timing, the court observed that no motions are pending, discovery “has only just begun,” and it expects discovery to be “narrow in scope and exceedingly discreet.” With nearly four months until fact discovery is scheduled to close, it said, Combs “has ample time to retain new counsel.” The next pretrial conference is set for Feb. 5, 2027. (Id. at 2, 4.) The order terminates Erica A. Wollf, Mark E. Cuccaro, Raphael A. Friedman and Michael Tremonte. It does not name successor counsel. (Id. at 4.)
The Retaining Lien
A retaining lien lets withdrawing counsel keep a client’s pleadings and other documents until the lawyer is paid. The court considered whether the firm withdrew for cause and whether exigent circumstances, such as papers essential to a criminal defense or the client’s indigency, called for releasing the papers. It found the firm entitled to the lien, noting that its withdrawal is for good cause and that “there are no exigent circumstances.” (Id. at 4–5.)
The court did not fix the amount, however, because the firm “has not submitted documentation supporting the total amount that Defendant owes.” It will fix the figure if and when Sher Tremonte submits evidence of what it is owed. (Id. at 5.) Sher Tremonte must serve the order on Combs by email to his power of attorney and by Priority Mail to Fort Dix, and file proof of service. (Id.)
What the Order Does Not Decide
The order accepts the firm’s declaration, which Combs did not oppose. It makes no finding on how much Combs owes or whether he disputes the account. It does not address the merits of Kelly’s claim.
Sources
Source: ECF Nos. 83, 86 and 92 on the Kelly v. Combs docket. The motion (ECF No. 89), declaration (ECF No. 90) and certificate of service (ECF No. 91) are described here only as the court summarizes them.
Diddy Docket reports on public court records. Parties are presumed innocent or not liable unless proven otherwise. This is not legal advice.
- p. 1 — Memorandum Opinion and Order (Caproni, J.), Kelly v. Combs et al., Case No. 1:24-cv-08024 (S.D.N.Y., Oct. 13, 2026) (ECF No. 92), p. 1 -- "WHEREAS on September 23, 2026, Sher Tremonte LLP (“Sher Tremonte” or the “Firm”), counsel for Defendant Sean Combs, filed a motion for leave to withdraw as counsel and for a retaining lien pursuant to Local Rule 1.4, see Dkt. 89;"
- p. 1 — Memorandum Opinion and Order (Caproni, J.), Kelly v. Combs et al., Case No. 1:24-cv-08024 (S.D.N.Y., Oct. 13, 2026) (ECF No. 92), p. 1 -- "“Mr. Combs has not paid a substantial balance of attorney’s fees, costs, and expenses,”"
- p. 1 — Memorandum Opinion and Order (Caproni, J.), Kelly v. Combs et al., Case No. 1:24-cv-08024 (S.D.N.Y., Oct. 13, 2026) (ECF No. 92), p. 1 -- "“Sher Tremonte’s representation has been rendered unreasonably difficult by Mr. Comb’s lack of cooperation and communications, resulting in a breakdown in the attorney-client relationship,”"
- p. 1 — Memorandum Opinion and Order (Caproni, J.), Kelly v. Combs et al., Case No. 1:24-cv-08024 (S.D.N.Y., Oct. 13, 2026) (ECF No. 92), p. 1 -- "“has not paid Sher Tremonte anything for over six months[,] and his last payment [was for] fees and expenses that were incurred in late 2025,”"
- p. 1 — Memorandum Opinion and Order (Caproni, J.), Kelly v. Combs et al., Case No. 1:24-cv-08024 (S.D.N.Y., Oct. 13, 2026) (ECF No. 92), p. 1 -- "“Mr. Combs has declined to make himself available for timely, substantive, and direct communications about his cases for over four months,”"
- p. 2 — Memorandum Opinion and Order (Caproni, J.), Kelly v. Combs et al., Case No. 1:24-cv-08024 (S.D.N.Y., Oct. 13, 2026) (ECF No. 92), p. 2 -- "“Mr. Combs has been notified on multiple occasions both by mail and through email to his power of attorney that Sher Tremonte would seek to withdraw as counsel unless Sher Tremonte’s legal fees were paid and he made himself available for timely, substantive, and direct communications about this case,”"
- p. 2 — Memorandum Opinion and Order (Caproni, J.), Kelly v. Combs et al., Case No. 1:24-cv-08024 (S.D.N.Y., Oct. 13, 2026) (ECF No. 92), p. 2 -- "Sher Tremonte’s withdrawal motion was served upon counsel of record for all parties by filing on ECF and upon Defendant by delivering a copy by email to Defendant’s power of attorney and by USPS Priority Mail to Defendant’s mailing address at FCI Fort Dix, see Dkt. 91;"
- p. 2 — Memorandum Opinion and Order (Caproni, J.), Kelly v. Combs et al., Case No. 1:24-cv-08024 (S.D.N.Y., Oct. 13, 2026) (ECF No. 92), p. 2 -- "WHEREAS the Court has not received an opposition to Sher Tremonte’s withdrawal motion;"
- p. 2 — Memorandum Opinion and Order (Caproni, J.), Kelly v. Combs et al., Case No. 1:24-cv-08024 (S.D.N.Y., Oct. 13, 2026) (ECF No. 92), p. 2 -- "WHEREAS the parties are in the early stages of discovery and the next pretrial conference is scheduled for February 5, 2027, see Dkt. 88;"
- p. 2 — Memorandum Opinion and Order (Caproni, J.), Kelly v. Combs et al., Case No. 1:24-cv-08024 (S.D.N.Y., Oct. 13, 2026) (ECF No. 92), p. 2 -- "IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Sher Tremonte’s motion to withdraw as counsel is GRANTED."
- p. 2 — Memorandum Opinion and Order (Caproni, J.), Kelly v. Combs et al., Case No. 1:24-cv-08024 (S.D.N.Y., Oct. 13, 2026) (ECF No. 92), p. 2 -- "the Court considers two factors: (i) “the reasons for withdrawal” and (ii) “the impact of the withdrawal on the timing of the proceeding.”"
- p. 3 — Memorandum Opinion and Order (Caproni, J.), Kelly v. Combs et al., Case No. 1:24-cv-08024 (S.D.N.Y., Oct. 13, 2026) (ECF No. 92), p. 3 -- "Courts within this circuit have found “satisfactory reasons” to include “the client’s failure to pay legal fees, a client’s lack of cooperation—including lack of communication with counsel, and the existence of an irreconcilable conflict between attorney and client.”"
- p. 3 — Memorandum Opinion and Order (Caproni, J.), Kelly v. Combs et al., Case No. 1:24-cv-08024 (S.D.N.Y., Oct. 13, 2026) (ECF No. 92), p. 3 -- "the Second Circuit has held that deliberately disregarding legal fees “may constitute ‘good cause’ to withdraw.”"
- p. 3 — Memorandum Opinion and Order (Caproni, J.), Kelly v. Combs et al., Case No. 1:24-cv-08024 (S.D.N.Y., Oct. 13, 2026) (ECF No. 92), p. 3 -- "Counsel’s declaration in this matter indicates “that the attorney-client relationship has indeed broken down here sufficient to warrant granting the motion to withdraw,”"
- p. 4 — Memorandum Opinion and Order (Caproni, J.), Kelly v. Combs et al., Case No. 1:24-cv-08024 (S.D.N.Y., Oct. 13, 2026) (ECF No. 92), p. 4 -- "There are currently no pending motions before the Court and discovery has only just begun. Furthermore, the Court expects that any discovery in this case will be narrow in scope and exceedingly discreet. Given that there are nearly four months until fact discovery is scheduled to conclude, see Dkt. 89 ¶ 4, Defendant has ample time to retain new counsel"
- p. 4 — Memorandum Opinion and Order (Caproni, J.), Kelly v. Combs et al., Case No. 1:24-cv-08024 (S.D.N.Y., Oct. 13, 2026) (ECF No. 92), p. 4 -- "the Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to TERMINATE (i) Erica A. Wollf, Esq., (ii) Mark E. Cuccaro, Esq., (iii) Raphael A. Friedman, Esq., and (iv) Michael Tremonte, Esq., of Sher Tremonte LLP, as Defendant’s attorneys of record in this case."
- p. 4 — Memorandum Opinion and Order (Caproni, J.), Kelly v. Combs et al., Case No. 1:24-cv-08024 (S.D.N.Y., Oct. 13, 2026) (ECF No. 92), p. 4 -- "IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Counsel’s request for the Court to affix a retaining lien is GRANTED. “New York cases recognize a distinct common law retaining lien that allows withdrawing counsel to retain pleadings and other documents in counsel’s possession until counsel is paid for his or her work.”"
- pp. 4-5 — Memorandum Opinion and Order (Caproni, J.), Kelly v. Combs et al., Case No. 1:24-cv-08024 (S.D.N.Y., Oct. 13, 2026) (ECF No. 92), pp. 4-5 -- "whether counsel withdrew for cause and whether there are “exigent circumstances (such as papers essential to the defense of a criminal charge, or the client’s indigency)” that warrant releasing the papers to the party."
- p. 5 — Memorandum Opinion and Order (Caproni, J.), Kelly v. Combs et al., Case No. 1:24-cv-08024 (S.D.N.Y., Oct. 13, 2026) (ECF No. 92), p. 5 -- "the Firm’s withdrawal is for good cause and there are no exigent circumstances"
- p. 5 — Memorandum Opinion and Order (Caproni, J.), Kelly v. Combs et al., Case No. 1:24-cv-08024 (S.D.N.Y., Oct. 13, 2026) (ECF No. 92), p. 5 -- "counsel “has not submitted documentation supporting the total amount that Defendant owes [Sher Tremonte]”"
- p. 5 — Memorandum Opinion and Order (Caproni, J.), Kelly v. Combs et al., Case No. 1:24-cv-08024 (S.D.N.Y., Oct. 13, 2026) (ECF No. 92), p. 5 -- "The amount of the retaining lien shall be fixed if and when Sher Tremonte submits evidence sufficient to demonstrate its entitlement to the sum sought."
- p. 5 — Memorandum Opinion and Order (Caproni, J.), Kelly v. Combs et al., Case No. 1:24-cv-08024 (S.D.N.Y., Oct. 13, 2026) (ECF No. 92), p. 5 -- "IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Sher Tremonte must serve this Order upon Defendant by delivering a copy by email to Defendant’s power of attorney and by USPS Priority Mail to Defendant’s mailing address at FCI Fort Dix, and to file proof of service on the docket."
- p. 1 — Opinion & Order (Caproni, J.), Kelly v. Combs et al., Case No. 1:24-cv-08024 (S.D.N.Y., Aug. 5, 2026) (ECF No. 83), p. 1 -- "Plaintiff Shante Kelly alleges that Defendant Sean Combs drugged and raped her at a party in New York City. She brought a claim pursuant to New York City’s Victims of Gender-Motivated Violence Protection Act"
- p. 9 — Opinion & Order (Caproni, J.), Kelly v. Combs et al., Case No. 1:24-cv-08024 (S.D.N.Y., Aug. 5, 2026) (ECF No. 83), p. 9 -- "Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED as to the Corporate Defendants and DENIED as to Combs."
- p. 9 — Opinion & Order (Caproni, J.), Kelly v. Combs et al., Case No. 1:24-cv-08024 (S.D.N.Y., Aug. 5, 2026) (ECF No. 83), p. 9 -- "Plaintiff’s claims against the Corporate Defendants are, therefore, DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE."
- p. 2 — Memo Endorsement (Caproni, J.), Kelly v. Combs et al., Case No. 1:24-cv-08024 (S.D.N.Y., Aug. 20, 2026) (ECF No. 86), p. 2 -- "The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to TERMINATE Defendants (i) Bad Boy Entertainment Holdings, Inc., and (ii) Bad Boy Productions Holdings, Inc., as parties to this action."