Department 58

Hearing Date: December 11, 2023

Case Name: Duncan v. Duncan

Case No.: 22STCV33544

Matter: Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel

Moving Party: Counsel for Defendants Jamisha Duncan and Jahlil Vigil

Responding Party: Unopposed

Tentative Ruling: The Motions to be Relieved as Counsel are granted.

Background and procedural history

On October 14, 2022, Plaintiff Jamilah Duncan (Plaintiff) filed a Complaint for (1.) partition of real property by sale (246 E 135^th St.), (2.) battery, (3.) negligence, (4.) intentional infliction of emotional distress, and (5.) negligent infliction of emotional distress.

Now, Defendants’ counsel – Steffanie Stelnick of the Law Offices of Steffanie Stelnick – seeks to be relieved as counsel of record as to both Defendants. No opposition was filed.

The motions to be relieved as counsel are granted.

Discussion

An attorney is entitled to withdraw upon the consent of the client, or without that consent if approved by the court. (Code Civ. Proc., § 284; Ramirez v. Sturdevant (1994) 21 Cal.App.4th 904, 915.) In the latter case, counsel must make a motion to be relieved as attorney of record. The motion must be made using mandatory forms: Notice of Motion and Motion to be Relieved as Counsel – Civil (MC-051), Declaration (MC-052), and Proposed Order (MC-053). (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1362, subd. (a), (b), (e).)

The declaration accompanying the motion to be relieved as counsel must 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).” (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1362, subd. (b).)

The notice to the client must be done by personal service, electronically, or mail. If it is done via mail under Code of Civil Procedure section 1013, it must be accompanied by a declaration confirming the service address to be the most current residence or that it is the client’s last known address, and the attorney has been unable to locate a more current address. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1362, subd. (d)(1)(A)-(B).)

Here, Attorney Stelnick has complied with the Rules of Court by filing all the appropriate forms (MC-051, MC-052, and MC-053). She has also submitted a supporting declaration providing an adequate explanation for why she is moving to be relieved as counsel; she asserts that there are irreconcilable differences that have resulted in a breakdown of the attorney client relationship.

However, Form MC-052 indicates that notice was provided to Defendants via mail and her clients’ addresses were confirmed by “LexisNexis.” It is unclear whether this is an adequate means of confirmation; the Court will hear from counsel on how specifically the addresses were verified.

Lastly, trial in this matter has not yet been set, and the next hearing is for a Case Management Conference, set for January 25, 2024. Thus, no prejudice will result from granting these motions.

Upon a satisfactory showing that the verification of her clients’ addresses was reasonably likely to ensure notice, the Court will grant the motions to be relieved as counsel.