Judge: Daniel M. Crowley, Case: 21STCV08291, Date: 2022-10-18 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 21STCV08291    Hearing Date: October 18, 2022    Dept: 28

Plaintiff Hector Aguinaga’s Counsel Ivy Grigoryan’s Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel

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

BACKGROUND

On March 3, 2021, Plaintiff Hector Aguinaga (“Plaintiff”) filed this action against Defendants Kaiser Found. Hosp. (“KFH”), Kaiser Permanente Intl. (“KPI”) and Kaiser Permanente Baldwin Park (“KPBP”) for general negligence and premises liability. 

On September 8, 2021, Kaiser Foundational Hospital, on behalf of KFG and KPMP (“Defendant”) filed an answer. On April 11, 2022, the Court dismissed KPI, without prejudice, pursuant to Plaintiff’s request. 

On September 26, 2022, Plaintiff’s counsel, Ivy Grigoryan, filed a Motion to be Relieved as Counsel to be heard on October 18, 2022.

Trial is currently scheduled for February 16, 2023.

PARTY’S REQUESTS

Plaintiff’s counsel, Ivy Grigoryan, requests 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, MC-052 and MC-053 form. Counsel has provided a declaration stating that there has been an irreconcilable breakdown in communication. Counsel has indicated that Plaintiffs were served via mail at Plaintiff’s last known address; counsel was unable to verify the address but attempted to do so prior to serving the motion. Counsel submitted proof of service on all parties, in addition. The Court grants the motion.   

CONCLUSION

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