Judge: David B. Gelfound, Case: 23CHCV00945, Date: 2025-03-24 Tentative Ruling

Counsel wishing to submit on a tentative ruling may inform the clerk or courtroom assistant in North Valley Department F49, 9425 Penfield Ave., Chatsworth, CA 91311, at (818) 407-2249.  Please be aware that unless all parties submit, the matter will still be called for hearing and may be argued by any appearing/non-submitting parties. If the matter is submitted on the court's tentative ruling by all parties, counsel for moving party shall give notice of ruling. This may be done by incorporating verbatim the court's tentative ruling. The tentative ruling may be extracted verbatim by copying and pasting, as unformatted text, from the Los Angeles Superior Court’s website, http://www.lasuperiorcourt.org.
All hearings on law and motion and other calendar matters are generally NOT transcribed by a court reporter unless one is provided by the party(ies). 

Case Number: 23CHCV00945    Hearing Date: March 24, 2025    Dept: F49

LOS ANGELES SUPERIOR COURT

NORTH VALLEY DISTRICT

DEPARTMENT F49

MOTION TO BE RELIEVED AS COUNSEL

Motion filed: 11/12/24

MOVING PARTY: Counsel Heather McKeon of Tharpe & Howell, LLP

RESPONDING PARTY: None.

NOTICE: OK.

RELIEF REQUESTED: An order relieving Heather McKeon of Tharpe & Howell, LLP

 as counsel of record for Plaintiff Gerald Pereira.

TENTATIVE RULING: The motion is GRANTED.

BACKGROUND

This action arises from disputes concerning a residential lease agreement.

On March 30, 2023, Plaintiff Gerald Pereira (“Petitioner” or “Pereira”) filed a Complaint against Defendant Genevieve Salazar (“Defendant” or “Salazar”) and Does 1 to 25, alleging the following causes of action: (1) breach of contract, (2) intentional tort, and (3) general negligence. No responsive pleadings have been filed.

On January 28, 2025, Plaintiff’s counsel Heather McKeon of Tharpe & Howell, LLP (“Counsel” or “McKeon”) filed the instant Motion to be Relieved as Counsel (the “Motion”).

No Opposition or Reply papers have been received by the Court.

ANALYSIS

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 Civ. Proc., § 284, subd. (2).) “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.) An application to be relieved as counsel must be made on Judicial Council Forms MC-051 (Notice of Motion and Motion), MC-052 (Declaration), and MC-053 (Proposed Order). (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1362, subd. (a), (c), (e).)

In addition, California Rules of Court, rule 3.1362, subsection (d) requires that the notice of motion and motion, declaration, and proposed order be served on the client and all other parties who have appeared in the case by personal service, electronic service, or mail. If the notice is served by mail, it must be accompanied by a declaration stating facts showing that either:

            (A) The service address is the current residence or business address of the client; or

(B) The service address is the last known residence or business address of the client and the attorney has been unable to locate a more current address after making reasonable efforts to do so within 30 days before the filing of the motion to be relieved.

            (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1362(d)(1).)

Here, Counsel has filed Judicial Council Forms MC-051 and MC-052. Counsel has also lodged Judicial Council Form MC-053 with the Court.

Counsel states that the Motion is necessitated by “breakdown of communication between counsel and defendant [sic].” (MC-052 ¶ 2.) Additionally, Counsel presents that “since June 27, 2024, my office has made attempts to contact Mr. Pereira utilizing different methods including phone call, regular mail, and email. My office made attempts to contact Mr. Pereira on June 27, 2024, via regular mail; on October 2, 2024, via email, phone call, and regular mail. None of the defense [sic] counsel’s outreach has received a response from Mr. Pereira.” (Ibid.)

The Court finds Counsel’s reasons for seeking relief to be adequate.

Moreover, Counsel states in the declaration that the Motion was served by mail at Plaintiff’s last known address. (MC-052, ¶ 3a(2).) Counsel further declares that she has been unable to confirm that the address is current or to locate a more current address for the client after making the following efforts: mailing the motion papers to the client’s last known address, return receipt requested; calling the client’s last known telephone number or numbers; emailing client at the address he provided on October 2, 2024. (Id. ¶ 3b(2).)  Counsel claims that Plaintiff’s failure to respond, despite Counsel’s prolonged outreach efforts, justifies granting the Motion. (Id. ¶ 4.)

Counsel indicates that a jury trial has not yet been set. (MC-052 ¶ 6(a).) Additionally, the case file shows that no future hearing in this matter has been scheduled.

Based on the foregoing, the Court GRANTS the Motion to be Relieved as Counsel.

CONCLUSION

The Motion to be Relieved as Counsel for Plaintiff Gerald Pereira, filed by Heather McKeon of Tharpe & Howell, LLP, is GRANTED.

Moving counsel to give notice.