Judge: Daniel M. Crowley, Case: 20STCV36206, Date: 2022-10-19 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 20STCV36206    Hearing Date: October 19, 2022    Dept: 28

Plaintiff Ivory Wilborne’s Counsel W. Keith Wyatt’s Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel

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

BACKGROUND

On September 22, 2020, Plaintiff Ivory Wilborne (“Plaintiff”) filed this action against Defendants Marco Transport, Inc. (“Marco”) and Suren Reyes Martinez (“Martinez”) for motor vehicle negligence. 

On May 21, 2021, Marco filed an answer.  On October 11, 2022, the Court dismissed Marco, with prejudice. On October 12, 2022, Martinez filed an answer.

On September 26, 2022, Plaintiffs’ counsel, W. Keith Wyatt, filed a Motion to be Relieved as Counsel to be heard on October 19, 2022.

Trial is currently scheduled for November 30, 2022.

PARTY’S REQUESTS

Plaintiffs’ counsel, W. Keith Wyatt, request to be relieved as counsel for Plaintiff.

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 a completed MC-051 and MC-052. Counsel has provided a declaration stating that there has been an irreconcilable breakdown in communication. Counsel has indicated that Plaintiff was served via mail; counsel was unable to confirm the address but made efforts to do so by mailing with a return receipt requested, calling the last known telephone number, and trying to contact Plaintiff’s daughter.

Counsel did not submit a MC-053 form, which is required under the CRC. The Court denies the motion.

CONCLUSION

Counsel for Plaintiff’s Motion to be Relieved as Counsel is DENIED.

             Counsel for Plaintiff is ordered to give notice of this ruling.

Counsel for Plaintiff 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.