Judge: Daniel M. Crowley, Case: 21STCV24356, Date: 2022-10-25 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 21STCV24356    Hearing Date: October 25, 2022    Dept: 28

Application for an Order Admitting Rachael Dettman Spiegel as Counsel Pro Hac Vice

Having considered the moving papers, the Court rules as follows.  No opposing papers were filed.

BACKGROUND

            On September 25, 2019, Dana S. Garbowski (“Plaintiff”) purchased a Cobb salad from a restaurant in La Canada, California, known as Dish (“Defendant Dish”).  Defendant Dish is owned and managed by Elite Restaurant Group, Inc. (“Defendant Elite”) and Slaters RC, Inc. (“Defendant Slaters”).  The Cobb salad contained salmonella, and Plaintiff suffered personal injuries after consuming the Cobb salad prepared and sold by Defendant Dish.

            On July 1, 2021, Plaintiff initiated the present action by filing a Complaint against Defendant Dish, Defendant Elite, Defendant Slaters, and Does 1 through 20 (collectively, “Defendants”).  Plaintiff’s Complaint alleges the following causes of action: (1) Breach of Implied Warranty; (2) Negligence; and (3) Strict Liability.

            On July 16, 2021, Defendant Dish and Defendant Elite, collectively, filed an Answer.

            On September 23, 2021, Defendant Slaters filed an Answer.

            On July 11, 2022, Plaintiff filed an “Amendment to Complaint (Fictitious/Incorrect Name),” substituting US Foods, Inc. (“Defendant US Foods”) as Doe 1.

            On July 12, 2022, Plaintiff dismissed Defendant Slaters from this action, with prejudice.

            On September 16, 2022, Defendant US Foods filed an Answer.

            On September 29, 2022, Defendant US Foods filed the present Application for an Order Admitting Rachael Dettman Spiegel as Counsel Pro Hac Vice.

            Trial is set for June29, 2023.

PARTY’S REQUESTS

Defendant US Foods moves for an Order admitting Rachael Dettman Spiegel, Esq. as counsel in this action pro hac vice.

LEGAL STANDARD

            California Rules of Court, Rule 9.40 governs counsel’s ability to appear in a matter as counsel pro hac vice.  (Cal. Rules of Court, Rule 9.40.)  Rule 9.40 states, “A person who is not a licensee of the State Bar of California but who is an attorney in good standing of and eligible to practice before the bar of any United States court or the highest court in any state, territory, or insular possession of the United States, and who has been retained to appear in a particular cause pending in a court of this state, may in the discretion of such court be permitted upon written application to appear as counsel pro hac vice, provided that an active licensee of the State Bar of California is associated as attorney of record.”  (Id., Rule 9.40, subd. (a).)  “No person is eligible to appear as counsel pro hac vice under this rule if the person is: (1) A resident of the State of California; (2) Regularly employed in the State of California; or (3) Regularly engaged in substantial business, professional, or other activities in the State of California.”  (Ibid.) 

            “A person desiring to appear as counsel pro hac vice in a superior court must file with the court a verified application together with proof of service by mail in accordance with Code of Civil Procedure section 1013a of a copy of the application and of the notice of hearing of the application on all parties who have appeared in the cause and on the State Bar of California at its San Francisco office.”  (Cal. Rules of Court, Rule 9.40, subd. (c)(1).)  “The application must state: (1) The applicant’s residence and office address; (2) The courts to which the applicant has been admitted to practice and the dates of admission; (3) That the applicant is a licensee in good standing in those courts; (4) That the applicant is not currently suspended or disbarred in any court; (5) The title of each court and cause in which the applicant has filed an application to appear as counsel pro hac vice in this state in the preceding two years, the date of each application, and whether or not it was granted; and (6) The name, address, and telephone number of the active licensee of the State Bar of California who is attorney of record.”  (Id., Rule 9.40, subd. (d).)  Additionally, the applicant must also “pay a reasonable fee not exceeding $50 to the State Bar of California with the copy of the application and the notice of hearing that is served on the State Bar.”  (Id., Rule 9.40, subd. (e).)

DISCUSSION

            Defendant US Foods presently moves for an Order admitting Rachael Dettman Spiegel (“Ms. Dettman Spiegel”), Esq. as counsel in this action pro hac vice.

            Following a review of Ms. Dettman Spiegel’s Verified Application, the Court finds the Application satisfies all requirements outlined within California Rules of Court, Rule 9.40.  (Cal. Rules of Court, Rule 9.40.)  Ms. Dettman Spiegel has submitted a Verified Declaration confirming, (a) Ms. Dettman Spiegel is neither a resident, regularly employed, nor regularly engaged in business, professional, or other activity in the State of California (Dettman Spiegel Decl., ¶ 3); (b) Ms. Dettman Spiegel’s residence and office address (id. ¶ 2.); (c) the courts to which Ms. Dettman Spiegel has been admitted to practice and the dates of admission (id. ¶ 5); (d) Ms. Dettman Spiegel has not been suspended or disbarred in any court, and is in good standing in those courts (id. ¶¶ 5-6); (e) Ms. Dettman Spiegel has not applied for admission to appear as counsel pro hac vice in the State of California in the past two years (id. ¶ 7); (f) the name, address, and telephone number of the active licensee of the State Bar of California who is attorney of record (id. ¶ 4; Koller Decl., ¶ 2); (g) Ms. Dettman Spiegel’s service of the Verified Application upon all parties who have appeared in this action and the State Bar of California’s San Francisco Office (Dettman Spiegel Decl., ¶ 9; Koller Decl., ¶ 4; Verified Application, at p. 6 [Proof of Service]); and (h) Ms. Dettman Spiegel’s payment of a fee in the amount of $50 to the State Bar of California (Dettman Spiegel Decl., ¶ 9; Koller Decl., ¶ 4).  As the present Verified Application and supporting evidentiary declarations sufficiently satisfy the requirements of California Rules of Court, Rule 9.40, Ms. Dettman Spiegel’s admission as counsel in this action pro hac vice may be appropriately permitted.  (Cal. Rules of Court, Rule 9.40.)

CONCLUSION

            Defendant US Foods filed the present Application for an Order Admitting Rachael Dettman Spiegel as Counsel Pro Hac Vice is GRANTED.

            Defendant US Foods is ordered to give notice of this ruling.

Defendant US Foods 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.