Which circumstance allows an attorney to permissively withdraw from representation?

The option regarding financial burden on the attorney allows for permissive withdrawal under the rules of professional conduct. When representing a client, if an attorney encounters a financial situation that significantly affects their ability to provide effective representation or is detrimental to the attorney's own financial well-being, they may seek to withdraw from the case. The rationale is that attorneys must manage their resources, including financial ones, to fulfill their obligations adequately.

In scenarios where the attorney's financial obligations hinder their ability to represent the client competently, ethical rules can acknowledge this as a valid reason for withdrawal. This reflects the principle that an attorney must be able to maintain a level of professionalism that may not be possible under severe financial strain.

The other circumstances, while potentially relevant to a decision not to continue representation, do not automatically qualify as justifiable grounds for withdrawal. For example, if a client refuses to listen to legal advice, this may present a challenge, but it does not permit withdrawal without further justification. Similarly, if the client simply desires to end the relationship, they can do so, but it is not the attorney’s unilateral choice to withdraw. Conflicts in scheduling could be problematic, but as long as the attorney can accommodate the client's needs adequately, withdrawal would not be warranted.