Judge: Andrew E. Cooper, Case: 23CHCV01421, Date: 2023-09-06 Tentative Ruling
Case Number: 23CHCV01421 Hearing Date: September 6, 2023 Dept: F51
MOTION TO BE
RELIEVED AS COUNSEL
Los Angeles Superior Court Case # 23CHCV01421
Motion filed: 6/6/23
MOVING ATTORNEY: Andrew R. Myers (“Counsel”)
CLIENT: Plaintiff, David Scott Brown (“Plaintiff”)
NOTICE: OK
RELIEF REQUESTED: An order relieving Counsel as attorney
of record for Plaintiff.
TENTATIVE RULING: The motion is granted.
In a civil action, an attorney may
move to be relieved as counsel at any time during the proceedings after giving
notice to his client. (Code Civ. Proc. § 284.) The moving attorney shall file
with his motion: (1) a notice of the motion, directed to the client using
Judicial Council form MC-051; (2) a declaration in support of the motion using
Judicial Council form MC-052; and (3) a proposed order granting the motion; all
to be served on the client and all other parties who have appeared in the case.
(Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1362.) If the notice is served on the client by
mail, the motion must also be supported by a declaration “stating facts showing
that either: (A) The service address is the current residence or business
address of the client; or (B) The service address is the last known residence
or business address of the client and the attorney has been unable to locate a
more current address after making reasonable efforts to do so within 30 days
before the filing of the motion to be relieved..” (Id., subd. (d)(1).)
In his declaration, the moving
attorney is required to state “in general terms, and without compromising the
confidentiality of the attorney-client relationship why a motion under Code of
Civil Procedure section 284(2) is brought instead of filing a consent under
Code of Civil Procedure section 284(1).” (Id., subd. (c).) The client
must be provided no less than five days’ notice before hearing on the motion.
An attorney may withdraw from a case when it can be accomplished without undue
prejudice to the client’s interests. (Ramirez v. Sturdevant (1994) 21
Cal.App.4th 904, 915.) On the other hand, if the attorney withdraws at a
critical point in the action, thereby prejudicing his client, he has violated
his ethical duties. (Ibid.)
Here, Counsel filed and served this
motion to be relieved as counsel for Plaintiff on 6/6/23. Counsel served his
client by mail, and has filed a declaration stating that the client’s mailing
address was verified by mail correspondence. (Decl. of Andrew R. Myers, ¶ 3b.)
Counsel also filed a proof of service showing that the requisite documents were
served on Plaintiff on 6/6/23. The Court notes that Defendant has not been
served with process and therefore has not yet appeared in the case.
Counsel properly filed an
accompanying notice of the motion using MC-051, a declaration in support of his
motion using form MC-052, and a proposed order granting the motion. In his
MC-052 declaration, Counsel cited a breakdown of the attorney-client relationship
rendering it “unreasonably difficult for Declarant to carry out representation
effectively.” (Myers Decl., ¶ 2.) The next hearing in this action is a case management
conference scheduled for 9/7/23. No trial date has been set, and as previously
mentioned, no defendant has been served. Therefore, Counsel’s withdrawal does
not raise the risk of unduly prejudicing his client.
*All future
hearings continued to December 7th, 2023.*