Judge: Daniel M. Crowley, Case: 21STCV19564, Date: 2022-12-07 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 21STCV19564    Hearing Date: December 7, 2022    Dept: 28

Plaintiff Ana Delmi Diaz Perez’s Counsel Michael R. Parker’s Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel

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

BACKGROUND

On May 24, 2021, Plaintiffs Ana Delmi Diaz Perez (“Perez”), Sebastian Gomez (“Gomez”) and Sebastian Esparza (“Esparza”) filed this action against Defendant Francisco Gonzalez (“Defendant”). 

On October 27, 2022, the Court dismissed Gomez and Esparza, with prejudice, pursuant to Plaintiffs request.

On October 28, 2022, Perez’s counsel, Michael R. Parker, filed a Motion to be Relieved as Counsel to be heard on December 7, 2022.

Trial is currently scheduled for February 3, 2023.

PARTY’S REQUESTS

Perez’s counsel, Michael R. Parker, 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, 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 Perez was served via mail at her last known address. Counsel was unable to confirm the address but took efforts to confirm the address by mailing the papers with a return receipt requested and calling Perez’s phone. Counsel, however, did not submit proof of service on Perez. The Court denies the motion for insufficient proof of service.

CONCLUSION

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

               Counsel is ordered to give notice of this ruling.

Counsel 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.