Judge: Audra Mori, Case: 21STCV29756, Date: 2023-02-01 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 21STCV29756    Hearing Date: February 1, 2023    Dept: 31

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - CENTRAL DISTRICT

Plaintiff Lidia Martinez’s (“Plaintiff”) attorney of record, RJ Molligan, Esq. of Razi Law Group, APLC (“Counsel”), seeks to be relieved as counsel contending there has been a complete breakdown in communication and irreconcilable differences have arisen such that Counsel cannot represent Plaintiff.  Counsel declares the moving papers were served on Plaintiff via mail at Plaintiff’s last known address.  Counsel has filed proof of service on Plaintiff and on Defendants that have appeared in the action. 

However, there are at least two issues that prevent the motion from being granted. 

First, Counsel’s proof of service indicates that the moving papers were served on Plaintiff by email.  California Rules of Court, Rule 3.1362(d)(2) states: “If the notice is served on the client by electronic service under Code of Civil Procedure section 1010.6 and rule 2.251, it must be accompanied by a declaration stating that the electronic service address is the client's current electronic service address.”  The Court cannot locate any such declaration with Counsel’s motion.

Second, Counsel filed and electronically served the moving papers on Plaintiff and Defendants on January 9, 2023.  “Unless otherwise ordered or specifically provided by law, all moving and supporting papers shall be served and filed at least 16 court days before the hearing.”  (CCP § 1005(b).)  Additionally, “Any period of notice, or any right or duty to do any act or make any response within any period or on a date certain after the service of the document, which time period or date is prescribed by statute or rule of court, shall be extended after service by electronic means by two court days.”  (CCP § 1010.6(a)(4)(B).)  Accordingly, Plaintiff was required to file and serve the moving papers by January 5, 2023.  (CCP §§ 1005(b), 1010.6(a)(3)(B).)  Defendant, thus, failed to give sufficient notice of the motion to Counsel’s client, Plaintiff, and to Defendants.

            Based on the foregoing, the motion is denied. 

Counsel is ordered to give notice. 

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE:

• Parties are encouraged to meet and confer after reading this tentative ruling to see if they can reach an agreement.
• If a party intends to submit on this tentative ruling, the party must send an email to the court at sscdept31@lacourt.org with the Subject line “SUBMIT” followed by the case number.  The body of the email must include the hearing date and time, counsel’s contact information, and the identity of the party submitting.  
• Unless all parties submit by email to this tentative ruling, the parties should arrange to appear remotely (encouraged) or in person for oral argument.  You should assume that others may appear at the hearing to argue.  
• If the parties neither submit nor appear at hearing, the Court may take the motion off calendar or adopt the tentative ruling as the order of the Court.  After the Court has issued a tentative ruling, the Court may prohibit the withdrawal of the subject motion without leave. 

Dated this 1^st day of February 2023