Judge: Daniel M. Crowley, Case: 23STCV28008, Date: 2024-10-18 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 23STCV28008    Hearing Date: October 18, 2024    Dept: 71

Superior Court of California

County of Los Angeles

 

DEPARTMENT 71

 

TENTATIVE RULING

 

NOSSAMAN, LLP, 

 

         vs.

 

BRANDABLE VENTURES LLC.

 Case No.:  23STCV28008

 

 

 

 Hearing Date:  October 18, 2024

 

Defendant Brandable Ventures, LLC’s Counsel, Ralph G. Martinez’s, Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel is denied.

 

On November 15, 2023, Plaintiff Nossaman, LLP (“Nossaman”) (“Plaintiff”) filed its operative Complaint against Defendant Brandable Ventures, LLC (“Brandable”) (“Defendant”).

On August 13, 2024, Defendant’s counsel, Ralph G. Martinez, of Martinez Law Office, Inc., filed the instant Motion to be Relieved as Counsel. 

Trial is set for July 21, 2025.

 

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 but failed to submit the required MC-052 and MC-053 forms. Counsel has provided a declaration, not on the required MC-052 form, stating Defendant “has failed to perform several times of the fee agreement” and such breaches have created a situation in which counsel is unable to perform his duties to Defendant because of the significant breakdown in communication and other factors going to the core of the attorney-client relationship.  (See Decl. of Martinez.)  Counsel failed to indicate Defendant was served with copies of the motion papers per C.C.P. §§1013 or 1010.6 and failed to attach a declaration attesting that the address of service is current.  (See Proof of Service.)

 

Conclusion

Defendant’s counsel’s Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel is denied.

Moving Party to give notice.

 

Dated:  October _____, 2024

                                                                            


Hon. Daniel M. Crowley

Judge of the Superior Court