Judge: Audra Mori, Case: 22STCV03733, Date: 2022-07-25 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 22STCV03733    Hearing Date: July 25, 2022    Dept: 31

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - CENTRAL DISTRICT

Plaintiff David Quiroz (“Plaintiff”) filed this action against defendants Camden Security Services, Rite Aid Corporation, and Rite Aid Hdqtrs. Corp. for injuries Plaintiff allegedly sustained when a security guard at a Rite Aid store physically struck Plaintiff. 

            On March 7, 2022, an answer was filed on behalf of Thrifty Payless, Inc. dba Rite Aid Corporation by the law firm of Baraban & Teske.  Thereafter, on March 9, 2022, an answer was filed on behalf of Rite Aid Corporation by the law firm of Resnick & Louis, P.C.  Following the filing of this answer, the court’s records show that Hannah A. Amor, Esq. (“Amor”) is the attorney of record for Rite Aid Corporation. 

            At this time, Rite Aid Corporation moves for an order (1) permitting Resnick & Louis, P.C. and Amor to withdraw as counsel of record for Rite Aid Corporation, (2) permitting Resnick & Louis, P.C. and Amor to represent Camden Security Services, Inc., (3) that Baraban & Teske and Jeffrey Baraban remain as counsel of record for Thrifty Payless, Inc. dba Rite Aid Corporation, and (4) the answer filed on March 7, 2022, be deemed the operative answer for Thrifty Payless, Inc. dba Rite Aid Corporation. 

The motion is unopposed, and Rite Aid Corporation submits a stipulation signed by counsel for Resnick & Louis, P.C. and Baraban & Teske.  (Mot. Exh. A.) 

CCP § 128(a)(8) provides that the court has the power “[t]o amend and control its process and orders so as to make them conform to law and justice.”  Furthermore, the court at any time can “[s]trike out any irrelevant, false, or improper matter inserted in any pleading,” or “[s]trike out all or any part of any pleading not drawn or filed in conformity with the laws of this state.”  (CCP § 436(a), (b); accord. CCP § 473(a)(1) [“The court may, in furtherance of justice, and on any terms as may be proper, allow a party to amend any pleading or proceeding by adding or striking out the name of any party, or by correcting a mistake in the name of a party, or a mistake in any other respect.”).] 

Here, Amor attests that she erroneously filed an answer on March 9, 2022, for Rite Aid Corporation.  Therefore, the March 9 answer should not have been filed for Rite Aid Corporation.

The court orders the answer erroneously filed on March 9, 2022, by Resnick & Louis, P.C. and Amor on behalf of Rite Aid Corporation stricken.  The answer filed on March 7, 2022, for Thrifty Payless, Inc. dba Rite Aid Corporation is deemed the operative answer.  Pursuant to the answer filed on March 7, 2022, Baraban & Teske and Jeffrey Baraban are counsel of record for Thrifty Payless, Inc. dba Rite Aid Corporation. 

However, the court does not grant or deny the request of Resnick & Louis, P.C. and Amor to be permitted to file a responsive pleading or answer on behalf of Camden Security Services, Inc.  There is no authority presented to show that it is appropriate for the court to authorize prospectively Resnick & Louis, P.C. and Amor to represent another party in this matter.  Camden Security Services, Inc., Resnick & Louis, P.C., and Amor must analyze the facts and law and determine whether and how it is appropriate for Resnick & Louis, P.C. and Amor to represent Camden Security Services, Inc. in this matter.  The court makes no legal or factual determinations concerning such representation at this time. 

Moving Defendant 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 25^th day of July 2022