Judge: Daniel M. Crowley, Case: 23STCV01565, Date: 2023-11-13 Tentative Ruling
Case Number: 23STCV01565 Hearing Date: March 4, 2024 Dept: 71
County
of Los Angeles
DEPARTMENT 71
TENTATIVE
RULING
SARA VAN HORN, et al.,
vs. THE WOMAN’S CLUB OF HOLLYWOOD, CALIFORNIA, et
al. |
Case
No.: 23STCV01565 Hearing Date: March 8, 2024 |
Defendants The Woman’s Club
of Hollywood, California’s and Rosemary Lord’s Counsel, Karen A. Rooney’s,
Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel is granted.
On
January 24, 2023, Plaintiffs Sara Van Horn (“Sara”) and Patrick Van Horn
(“Patrick”) (collectively, “Plaintiffs”) filed their operative Complaint
against Defendants The Woman’s Club of Hollywood, California (“WCH”) and Rosemary
Lord (“Lord”) (collectively, “Defendants”).
On July 17, 2023, Defendants filed their Answer.
On
February 9, 2024, Defendants’ counsel, Karen A. Rooney, filed the instant Motion
to be Relieved as Counsel.
Trial
is set for July 8, 2024.
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 completed MC-051, MC-052, and MC-053 forms.[1] Counsel has provided a declaration
stating a there is a breakdown of the attorney-client relationship. (See Decl. of Rooney.) Counsel has indicated that Defendants were
served with copies of the motion papers filed with the declaration at Defendants’
last known address and confirmed within the past 30 days that the address is
current by exchanging email at Defendants’ last known addresses and by
conversation.
Conclusion
Defendants’ counsel’s Motion
to Be Relieved as Counsel is granted.
Counsel will be relieved upon
filing proof of service on their client of the Order Granting Attorney’s Motion
to Be Relieved as Counsel—Civil (Judicial Council form MC-053).
Moving Party to give notice.
Dated: March _____, 2024
|
Hon.
Daniel M. Crowley |
Judge
of the Superior Court |
[1] The Court notes Rooney’s proposed order does not
include both Defendants’ names on the order.
The Court further notes
Rooney’s motion erroneously identifies the client, presumably in reference to
WCH as “a corporation,” thereby ignoring Lord and her status as an individual.