Judge: David B. Gelfound, Case: 23CHCV01685, Date: 2024-07-31 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 23CHCV01685    Hearing Date: July 31, 2024    Dept: F49

LOS ANGELES SUPERIOR COURT

NORTH VALLEY DISTRICT

DEPARTMENT F49

MOTION TO BE RELIEVED AS COUNSEL

Motion filed: 6/28/24

MOVING PARTY: Counsel Lindsay Weiss and Robert Davie, of Manning Gross & Massenburg, LLP (“MG&G”) (the “Counsel”)

RESPONDING PARTY: None.

NOTICE: OK.

RELIEF REQUESTED: An order relieving Counsel Jeffrey Baraban and the Law Firm of Baraban & Teske as counsel for Defendant Jose Manuel Armando Lorenzo-Reyes only

TENTATIVE RULING: The motion is CONTINUED.

BACKGROUND

On June 9, 2023, Plaintiffs Stephanie Michelle Najar and Edgar Jose Najar (collectively, “Plaintiffs”) filed their Complaint against Defendant Linda Blair/Worldheart Foundation (“Defendant”) and Does 1 to 10, alleging one cause of action for General Negligence. (Compl. ¶ 10.) The Complaint alleges that Defendant’s two pitbull dogs entered Plaintiffs’ property and caused personal injuries to them on November 11, 2022. (Compl. ¶ Att. “Cause of Action.”) Subsequently, Defendant filed its Answer to the Complaint on August 4, 2023.

On June 28, 2024, Defendant’s Counsel filed the instant Motion to be Relieved as Counsel (the “Motion”).

            No Opposition 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, subds. (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(1)(A) & (2).)

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

However, Counsel has not specified all hearing dates scheduled in the action on the submitted Judicial Council Form MC-053, thereby failing to meet the requirement under California Rules of Court, rule 3.1362(e).

Counsel has provided a declaration stating that the Motion is necessitated by “a breakdown of the working relationship” between Counsel and Defendant. (MC-025, p. 1.) Additionally, Counsel claims that “additional facts regarding the cause of the breakdown and which also give rise to this motion are confidential and required to be kept confidential pursuant to Business & Professions Code section 6068(e)(1), Rule 1.6(a) of the RPC, and by the attorney-client privilege.” (Ibid.)

The Court finds Counsel’s reasons for seeking relief to be satisfactory. Counsel states in his declaration that the Motion was served by personal service and by certified mail, return receipt requested, at Defendant’s last known address. (MC-052, ¶ 3(a)(2), Davis Decl. at p. 1.) Additionally, Counsel has confirmed that this address is current verifying it with Defendant’s latest Statement of Information filed with the California Secretary of State. (MC-052, ¶ 3(b).) Proof of Service has been filed separately with the Motion papers, demonstrating proper service on Defendant and all other parties who have appeared in the case.

The next hearing scheduled for this action is a Final Status Conference set for October 10, 2024, at 8:30 a.m. in Department F49 at 9425 Penfield Ave., Chatsworth, CA 91311. (MC-052, ¶ 4.) A jury trial is set for October 21, 2024. (Id. ¶ 6.))

Based on the foregoing, the Court CONTINUES the Motion to be Relieved as Counsel to allow additional time for Counsel to file the prepared Judicial Council Form MC-053, mandated by California Rules of Court rule 3.1362(e).

CONCLUSION

Defendant Linda Blair/Worldheart Foundation’s Counsel Lindsay Weiss, Robert L. Davis of Manning Gross & Massenburg, LLP’s Motion to be Relieved as Counsel is CONTINUED.

Moving counsel to give notice.