Judge: Cherol J. Nellon, Case: 20STCV12947, Date: 2023-05-16 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 20STCV12947    Hearing Date: May 16, 2023    Dept: 28

Plaintiff Lanisha Porter’s Counsel Hesam Yazdanpanah and the Law Offices of Hess Panah & Associates' Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel

Having considered the moving and supplemental papers, the Court rules as follows.

BACKGROUND

On April 2, 2020, Plaintiffs Lanisha Porter (“Lanisha”), Alyssa Porter (“Alyssa”) and Rashan Bailey (“Bailey”) filed this action against Defendant Robert Narche (“Defendant”) for negligence.

On November 10, 2021, Defendant filed an answer.

On April 5, 2023, Lanisha’s counsel, Hesam Yazdanpanah and the Law Offices of Hess Panah & Associates, filed a Motion to be Relieved as Counsel to be heard on May 16, 2023. On May 4, 2023, Defendant filed a declaration.

Trial is scheduled for December 22, 2023.

PARTY’S REQUESTS

Lanisha’s counsel, Hesam Yazdanpanah and the Law Offices of Hess Panah & Associates, request to be relieved as counsel for Lanisha.

LEGAL STANDARD

California Rule of Court rule 3.1362 (Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel) 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)).

The court has discretion to allow an attorney to withdraw, and such a motion should be granted provided that there is no prejudice to the client, and it does not disrupt the orderly process of justice. (Ramirez v. Sturdevant (1994) 21 Cal.App.4th 904, 915.)

DISCUSSION

Counsel has submitted completed MC-051, MC-052 and MC-053 forms. Counsel has provided a declaration stating that there has been an irreconcilable breakdown in the attorney-client relationship, noting that Lanisha has contacted opposing counsel outside counsel’s presence, and stated in her deposition she does not want to be represented by counsel. Defense counsel submitted a declaration stating that they have never spoken to any of the Plaintiffs in this suit, including Lanisha, outside of counsel's presence. Regardless, given the breakdown and statement by Lanisha, the Court finds good cause to grant the motion. Counsel has indicated that Lanisha was served at her last known address, confirmed by conversation. Counsel filed proof of service on Lanisha and Defendant; counsel represents the other Plaintiffs in this action, meaning all parties are on notice of the motion. The Court grants the motion.

CONCLUSION

Counsel's Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel is GRANTED. Counsel will be relieved upon filing proof of service upon the client of the Order Granting Attorney’s Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel--Civil (Judicial Council form MC-053).

Counsel is ordered to give notice of this ruling.

Counsel is ordered to file the proof of service of this ruling with the Court within five days.

The parties are directed to the header of this tentative ruling for further instructions.