Judge: Daniel M. Crowley, Case: 22STCV30629, Date: 2022-12-22 Tentative Ruling
Case Number: 22STCV30629 Hearing Date: December 22, 2022 Dept: 28
Motions to be Relieved as Counsel
Having considered the moving papers, the Court rules as follows:
BACKGROUND
This is a motor vehicle personal injury action. On September 20, 2022, Plaintiffs Darlene Morales, Ira Shermna, Cassandra Salgado, Darin Carrion, and Dana Carrion (“Plaintiffs”) filed a form PLD-PI-001 complaint against Defendant Jonta Roshawne Murphy (“Defendant”) alleging causes of action for motor vehicle and general negligence. Plaintiffs allege that on September 23, 2020, Defendant rear ended Plaintiffs while driving Westbound on SR-91 in the City of Cerritos.
Plaintiffs are represented by Kristina Akers of Samer Habbas & Associates, P.C. Counsel for Plaintiffs brings five motions to be relieved as counsel for the five Plaintiffs in this case. The motions are similar and unopposed.
PARTY’S REQUESTS
Kristina Akers of Samer Habbas & Associates, P.C. seeks to be relieved as counsel for Plaintiffs Darlene Morales, Ira Shermna, Cassandra Salgado, Darin Carrion, and Dana Carrion because there has been a breakdown in the attorney-client relationship.
LEGAL STANDARD
The court may order that an attorney be changed or substituted at any time before or after judgment or final determination upon request by either client or attorney and after notice from one to the other. (Code of Civ. Proc., § 284(b).) An attorney is permitted to withdraw where conflicts between the attorney and client make it unreasonable to continue the representation. (See Cal. Rules of Prof. Conduct 3-700(C)(1).) “The determination whether to grant or deny a motion to withdraw as counsel lies within the sound discretion of the trial court.” (Manfredi & Levine v. Superior Court (1998) 66 Cal.App.4th 1128, 1133.)
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)).
DISCUSSION
Here, counsel for Plaintiffs has filed a motion and notice of motion to be relieved as counsel for each of the five plaintiffs on form MC-051. Counsel has also filed declarations on form MC-052 for each plaintiff. On form MC-052 counsel states there has been an irreparable breakdown in the attorney-client relationship with respect to each plaintiff. Counsel further states that she can provide additional details in camera if necessary. Counsel provides valid reason to withdraw. Furthermore, minimal discovery has taken place and trial is not scheduled until March of 2024—thus, Plaintiffs will not be prejudiced if Ms. Akers is relieved as counsel.
However, counsel for Plaintiffs has not filed a proposed order granting her motion to be relieved as counsel on form MC-053 for each client. This is required by Rules of Court 3.1362. In addition, the proofs of service counsel filed on October 13, 2022 indicate that each client was only served with the “Order Granting Attorney's Motion to be Relieved as Counsel.” Rules of Court 3.1362(d) requires that “[t]he notice of motion and motion, the declaration, and the proposed order must be served on the client and on all other parties who have appeared in the case.”
Since counsel for Plaintiff has not filed a proposed order granting her motion to be relieved as counsel on form MC-053 for each client, and has not filed proof of service of forms MC-051, MC-052, and MC-053 on all parties who have appeared in this case, her motions to be relieved as counsel must be denied.
CONCLUSION
Plaintiff’s counsel Kristina Akers Motion to be Relieved as Counsel for Darlene Morales is DENIED.
Plaintiff’s counsel Kristina Akers Motion to be Relieved as Counsel for Ira Shermna is DENIED.
Plaintiff’s counsel Kristina Akers Motion to be Relieved as Counsel for Cassandra Salgado is DENIED.
Plaintiff’s counsel Kristina Akers Motion to be Relieved as Counsel for Darin Carrion is DENIED.
Plaintiff’s counsel Kristina Akers Motion to be Relieved as Counsel for Dana Carrion is DENIED.
Plaintiff is ordered to give notice of this ruling.
The parties are directed to the header of this tentative ruling for further instructions.