Judge: Daniel M. Crowley, Case: 23STCV12303, Date: 2024-07-14 Tentative Ruling
Case Number: 23STCV12303 Hearing Date: March 15, 2024 Dept: 71
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES
DEPARTMENT 71
TENTATIVE RULING
UC 2870 WEST OLYMPIC HOLDER, LLC, vs. 2870 O CONSORTIUM LLC, et al. | Case No.: 23STCV12303 Hearing Date: March 15, 2024 |
Defendants 2870 O Consortium LLC’s, Live Works Create Equity LLC’s, and Perri Lee’s Counsel, Ashlee Lin’s, Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel is granted.
On May 31, 2024, Plaintiff UC 2870 West Olympic Holder, LLC’s (“UC 2870”) (“Plaintiff”) filed its operative Complaint against Defendants 2870 O Consortium LLC (“2870 O”), Live Works Create Equity LLC (“Live Works”), Perri Lee (“Lee”), and other named Defendants (collectively, “Defendants”). On July 20, 2023, Live Works, and Lee filed their Answer to Plaintiff’s Complaint.
On November 20, 2023, Cross-Complainant Rosewood Assets, LLC (“Rosewood”) (“Cross-Complainant”) filed its initial Cross-Complaint against 2870 O, Live Works, Lee, and other Cross-Defendants. On November 27, 2023, Rosewood filed its operative First Amended Cross-Complaint (“FACC”). On December 22, 2023, 2870 O, Live Works, and Lee filed their Answer to Rosewood’s FACC.
On November 29, 2023, 2870 O’s, Live Works’, and Lee’s counsel, Ashlee Lin of Eisner LLP, filed the instant Motion to be Relieved as Counsel.
Trial is not set in this matter.
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. Counsel has provided a declaration there is a genuine basis for withdrawal pursuant to California Rules of Professional Conduct, Rule 1.16, including but not limited to, subsection 1.16(b)(5). (See Decl. of Lin.) Counsel declares that despite her attempts to resolve these matters for months, the clients have not cured the bases for this motion. (See Decl. of Lin.) Counsel has indicated that her clients were served with copies of the motion papers filed with the declaration at their last known address and confirmed within the past 30 days that the address is current by telephone.
Conclusion
2870 O’s, Live Works’, and Lee’s 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 |