Judge: Christian R. Gullon, Case: 22STCV16288, Date: 2024-05-28 Tentative Ruling

The Court may change tentative rulings at any time. Therefore, attorneys are advised to check this website to determine if any changes or updates have been made to the tentative ruling.

Counsel may submit on the tentative rulings by calling the clerk in Dept. O at 909-802-1126 before 8:30 the morning of the hearing. Submission on the tentative does not bind the court to adopt the tentative ruling at the hearing should the opposing party appear and convince the court of further modification during oral argument.

The Tentative Ruling is not an invitation, nor an opportunity, to file any further documents relative to the hearing in question. No such filing will be considered by the Court in the absence of permission first obtained following ex-parte application therefore.

Case Number: 22STCV16288    Hearing Date: May 28, 2024    Dept: O

Tentative Ruling

Plaintiff’s Counsel Tom Kinan’s Motion to be Relieved as Counsel is GRANTED, effective upon [see below].

Background

This is a negligence case. Plaintiff Vanessa Melody Singh alleges the following against Defendants Friendly Franchisees Corporation dba Carls Junior (“Carls Junior”); Manager Jasmine; Peco Foods, Inc.: On May 17, 2020, Plaintiff bit into a chicken nugget that contained a metal spring.

On May 1, 2022, Plaintiff filed suit.

On December 7, 2022, Carls Junior and Manager Jasmine filed a cross-complaint (CC) against Peco Foods, Inc. for (1) indemnity and (2) apportionment of fault. That same day, said defendants also filed their answer.

On December 15, 2023, Peco filed its answer to the CC.

On March 4, 2024, Peco Foods, Inc. filed its answer to the complaint.

On April 15, 2024, the parties attended an IDC.

On April 22, 2024, Carls Junior filed a ‘MOTION TO COMPEL FURTHER RESPONSES TO FORM INTERROGATORIES – GENERAL, SET ONE, FROM PLAINTIFF; MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES; REQUEST FOR SANCTIONS IN THE AMOUNT OF  $ 1,680.00; DECLARATION OF JOEL S. POREMBA.’

On May 2, 2024, Plaintiff’s Counsel filed the instant motion.

Future hearings: CMC set for 5/28/24 and Discovery Motion set for 6/5/24.

Discussion

Counsel Tom Kinan seeks to be relieved as counsel because Plaintiff is not cooperating in the litigation process.

Here, the court finds good cause to grant the motion. Should there be any prejudice by granting the motion, the client, despite receiving notice of the motion, has not filed an opposition to convey any concerns. Additionally, even should Plaintiff raise concerns with prejudice, the court finds concerns with prejudice mitigated as there is no trial date set and no substantive motions on calendar that require Plaintiff’s immediate representation. According, Plaintiff has sufficient time to retain new counsel.

Therefore, as Plaintiff’s Counsel has complied with the California Rules of Court, the court grants the motion.

Conclusion

Based on the foregoing, the motion is granted effective upon service of motion and the court’s order upon Plaintiff, Defendants, and all other parties who have appeared.