Judge: Christopher K. Lui, Case: 23STCV09263, Date: 2024-06-11 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 23STCV09263    Hearing Date: June 11, 2024    Dept: 76

            Plaintiffs allege that Defendants have failed to remediate uninhabitable conditions at the rental units.

            Attorney Friedman & Chapman, LLP moves to be relieved as counsel for Plaintiffs Ebony Martin and Gregory McKeown.

TENTATIVE RULING

            Attorney Friedman & Chapman, LLP’s motions to be relieved as counsel for Plaintiffs Ebony Martin and Gregory McKeown are GRANTED. This order shall become effective upon the filing of the proof of service of the signed order upon the clients. 

ANALYSIS

Motions To Be Relieved As Counsel

            Attorney Friedman & Chapman, LLP moves to be relieved as counsel for Plaintiffs Ebony Martin and Gregory McKeown.

California Rules of Court, Rule 3.1362 requires that the following Mandatory Judicial Council forms be filed for a motion to be relieved as counsel: Notice of Motion and Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel--Civil (form MC-051); Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel--Civil (form MC-052); and Order Granting Attorney's Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel--Civil (form MC-053). (See Calif. Rules of Court, Rule 3.1362(a), (c), (e).)  These three forms must be served on must be served on the client and on all other parties who have appeared in the case. (Calif. Rules of Court, Rule 3.1362(d).)

The Court may issue an order allowing an attorney to withdraw from representation, after notice to the client. (Code Civ. Proc., § 284(2).) An attorney may withdraw with or without cause as long as the withdrawal would not result in undue prejudice to the client's interest - i.e., counsel cannot withdraw at a critical point in the litigation because that would prejudice client, but can withdraw otherwise.  (Ramirez v. Sturdevant (1994) 21 Cal.App.4th 904, 915.) The court has discretion to deny an attorney’s request to withdraw where such withdrawal would work an injustice or cause undue delay in the proceeding; but the court’s discretion in this area is one to be exercised reasonably. (Mandell v. Superior Court (1977) 67 Cal.App.3d 1, 4.)

All mandatory Judicial Council forms have been submitted and filled out.

The client has failed to respond to communication efforts by counsel. (Declarations, ¶ 2.)

Trial is currently set for July 14 2025, which gives the clients time to locate new counsel, if they wish but need not do, as individuals may represent themselves in pro per.

Here, permitting withdrawal of counsel is appropriate because counsel need not represent clients who do not communicate with counsel.

All mandatory Judicial Council forms have been submitted and filled out.

The motions to be relieved as counsel are GRANTED. This order shall become effective upon the filing of the proof of service of the signed order upon the clients.