Lieberman v. Polytop Corp.

The court has determined that oral argument may be dispensed with in this case. See Fed.R.App.P. 34(a)(2)(C); 1st Cir.LoaR. 34(b). After a thorough review of the record and of the parties’ submissions, we find that we do have jurisdiction over this interlocutory appeal, and we reverse the lower court’s decision denying appellant George E. Lieberman’s (“Lieberman’s”) motion to withdraw from his representation of his clients, Industrial Distribution Corporation (“IDC”) and Gerhard Hutter (“Hutter”).

This is an appropriate interlocutory appeal under the collateral order doctrine. See Cohen v.…