Judge: Christian R. Gullon, Case: 23PSCV02266, Date: 2023-12-13 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 23PSCV02266    Hearing Date: December 13, 2023    Dept: O

Tentative Ruling

 

Plaintiff’s Counsel’s Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel Re: Christopher Floyd is GRANTED, effective upon [see below].[1]

 

Background

 

This is a habitability case.

 

On July 26, 2023, Plaintiffs ERIN LOPEZ; CAMERON FLOYD, and CHRISTOPHER FLOYD, filed suit against Defendants HARRIS BROS and COVINA ROLLINGWOOD APARTMENTS for:


1.     Violation Of California Civil Code § 1942.4

2.     Tortious Breach Of The Warranty Of Habitability

3.     Private Nuisance

4.     Business And Professions Code § 17200, Et Seq.

5.     Negligence

6.     Breach Of Covenant Of Quiet Enjoyment

7.     Intentional Infliction Of Emotional Distress

 

On November 9, 2023, Plaintiff’s counsel, Jacob O. Partiyeli, filed the instant motion.

 

An OSC Re: POS and a CMC are both set for 1/04/2024.

 

Discussion

 

According to counsel’s declaration, there has been a breakdown in client communications, which makes it impossible for counsel to act in Plaintiff’s best interest. Counsel has attempted to contact the client on several occasions but has never received a response. The lack of ongoing communication prevents us from effectively representing him in this matter.

 

As (i) Counsel has complied with all California Rules of Court Rule 3.1362 (filed MC-051, 052, and 053 forms), (ii) Counsel appropriately served Plaintiff and Defendants, (iii) no substantive motion is calendar that would warrant immediate representation (suggesting no prejudice) and (iv) the action is relatively recent, the court grants the motion.

 

Conclusion

 

Based on the foregoing, Plaintiff’s Counsel’s Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel is GRANTED, effective upon serving this court’s order relieving Counsel sent to Plaintiff, Defendant, and all other parties who have appeared in the case.

 


[1] Though the court will seek clarification as to whether Counsel seeks to be relieved as to all Plaintiffs or solely as to Christopher Floyd. The proposed order (053 form) and notice of motion and motion (051 form) both mention Christopher, but the declaration (052 form) references all Plaintiffs. (See section 1 of 052 compared to Section 1 of 053 form.) That said, as Counsel’s declaration specifically references Christopher Floyd, the court reasonably presumes the motion is only as to one of the three plaintiffs.