Judge: Anne Richardson, Case: 20STCV02320, Date: 2023-02-16 Tentative Ruling

DEPARTMENT 40 - JUDGE ANNE RICHARDSON - LAW AND MOTION RULINGS
The Court issues tentative rulings on certain motions. The tentative ruling will not become the final ruling until the hearing [see CRC 3.1308(a)(2)]. If the parties wish to submit on the tentative ruling and avoid a court appearance, all counsel must agree and choose which counsel will give notice. That counsel must 1) call Dept 40 by 8:30 a.m. on the day of the hearing (213/633-0160) and state that all parties will submit on the tentative ruling, and 2) serve notice of the ruling on all parties. If any party declines to submit on the tentative ruling, then no telephone call is necessary and all parties should appear at the hearing in person or by Court Call. 



Case Number: 20STCV02320    Hearing Date: February 16, 2023    Dept: 40

MICHELLE AMARAL-SALCEDO,

Plaintiff,

v.

XENCOR INC., et al.,

Defendants.

 Case No.: 20STCV02320

 Hearing Date: February 16, 2023

 Trial Date: Not Set (Arbitration)

 [TENTATIVE] RULING RE:

Michael A. DesJardins’s Motion to be Relieved as Counsel for Plaintiff.

 On January 17, 2020, Plaintiff Michelle Amaral-Salcedo brought this wrongful termination action against Defendants Xencor Inc., Sean Casey, and John Kuch. On September 2, 2020, the parties stipulated to binding arbitration.

Michael DesJardins now brings a motion to be relieved as counsel for Plaintiff.

On January 17, 2020, Plaintiff Michelle Amaral-Salcedo (“Plaintiff”) brought this wrongful termination action against Defendants Xencor Inc., Sean Casey, and John Kuch (“Defendants”). On September 2, 2020, the parties stipulated to binding arbitration. Arbitration is scheduled for June 3, 2023, and a post-arbitration status conference is scheduled for June 30, 2023.

 Michael DesJardins (“Counsel”) now brings a motion to be relieved as counsel for Plaintiff. The Motion is unopposed.

 The court may order that an attorney be changed or substituted at any time before or after judgment or final determination upon request by either client or attorney and after notice from one to the other. (Code of Civ. Proc., § 284(b).) An attorney is permitted to withdraw where conflicts between the attorney and client make it unreasonable to continue the representation.  (See Cal. Rules of Prof. Conduct 3-700(C)(1).) “The determination whether to grant or deny a motion to withdraw as counsel lies within the sound discretion of the trial court.” (Manfredi & Levine v. Superior Court (1998) 66 Cal.App.4th 1128, 1133.)  The court should consider whether the attorney’s “withdrawal can be accomplished without undue prejudice to the client’s interests.”  (Ramirez v. Sturdivant (1994) 21 Cal.App.4th 904, 915.)

California Rule of Court rule 3.1362 requires: (1) notice of motion and motion to be directed to the client (made on the Notice of Motion and Motion to be Relieved as Counsel—Civil form (MC-051)); (2) a declaration stating 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) (made on the Declaration in Support of Attorney's Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel—Civil form (MC-052)); (3) service of the notice of motion and motion and declaration on all other parties who have appeared in the case; and (4) the proposed order relieving counsel (prepared on the Order Granting Attorney's Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel—Civil form (MC-053)). 

Here, Counsel filed Forms MC-051 and MC-052 on December 20, 2022, and Form MC-053 on February 2, 2023. All three forms attach proof of service on Plaintiff and the attorneys for Defendants. Counsel states he served Plaintiff my email and by U.S. mail to her last known address. The requirements of Rules of Court, rule 3.1362 have been met.

On Form MC-052 (Declaration in Support), Counsel states that communications between he and Plaintiff have broken down to the point that it is unreasonably difficult for Counsel to continue to represent Plaintiff effectively. The Court finds this to be valid reason to withdraw as counsel. Arbitration is set for June 5, 2023, which gives Plaintiff approximately 15 weeks to find a new attorney. Plaintiff can also request a continuance of the arbitration hearing date. Withdrawal can therefore be accomplished without undue prejudice to Plaintiff.

Accordingly, Counsel’s Motion is granted.