Judge: David B. Gelfound, Case: 24CHCV01690, Date: 2025-06-10 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: 24CHCV01690    Hearing Date: June 10, 2025    Dept: F49

Dept. F49

Date: 6/10/25

Case Name: Ruth Burgoa

v. Cristian Juarez, Roque

Berumen, and Does 1

through 100

Case No. 24CHCV01690

LOS ANGELES SUPERIOR COURT

NORTH VALLEY DISTRICT

DEPARTMENT F49

JUNE 10, 2025

MOTION TO BE RELIEVED AS COUNSEL

Los Angeles Superior Court Case No. 24CHCV01690

Motion filed: 8/29/24

MOVING PARTY: Counsel Kevin Crockett of Crockett Law Group, LLP for Plaintiff Ruth Burgoa

RESPONDING PARTY: None

NOTICE: OK.

RELIEF REQUESTED: An order relieving Kevin Crockett of Crockett Law Group, LLP as counsel for Plaintiff Ruth Burgoa

TENTATIVE RULING: The motion is GRANTED.

BACKGROUND

This action arises from damages that Plaintiff allegedly sustained from a motor vehicle collision on May 5, 2022.

On May 3, 2024, Plaintiff Ruth Burgoa (“Plaintiff” or “Burgoa”) filed a Complaint against Defendants Cristian Juarez (“Juarez”), Roque Berumen (“Berumen”) (collectively, “Defendants”) and Does 1 through 100. The Complaint does not specify a cause of action.

On August 29, 2024, Plaintiff’s counsel Kevin Crockett of Crockett Law Group, LLP (“Counsel”) filed the instant Motion to be Relieved as Counsel (the “Motion”). On June 3, 2025, Counsel filed a Notice of Non-receipt of Opposition to 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, 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(1)(A) & (2).)

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 has provided a declaration stating that the Motion is necessitated by Plaintiff’s unresponsiveness to communications, stating that “Ruth Burgoa has not responded to repeated attempts by Crockett Law Group to communicate with her, including by phone, text, mail, or e-mail. Since filing this action, Crockett Law Group sent 4 text messages, 3 e-mails, 7 voice messages, and 2 certified letters that were confirmed delivered. Crockett Law Group hired a private investigator to make contact with Ms. Burgoa, but she was similarly unresponsive to the private investigator. Crockett Law Group spoke with Ms. Burgoa’s mother, who verified the phone number used for voice messages and text messages was correct, and Ms. Burgoa’s mother agreed to discuss with her daughter the importance of contacting our office. Thereafter, Crockett Law Group left 2 follow up voice messages for Ms. Burgoa’s mother. On August 13, 2024, Ms. Burgoa’s mother answered, but was unable to provide any further assistance in contacting Ms. Burgoa.” (MC-052, ¶ 2.)

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

Moreover, Counsel states in his declaration that the Motion was served by mail at Plaintiff’s last known address. (MC-052, ¶ 3a(2).) Additionally, Counsel declares that Plaintiff’s last known address has been confirmed within the last 30 days as current through mail with return receipt requested. (Id. ¶ 3b(1)(a).)

Counsel indicates that a jury trial is not yet set. (MC-052, ¶ 6; MC-053, ¶ 9.) Additionally, according to the case file, no future hearings in this action have been scheduled.

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

CONCLUSION

The Motion to be Relieved as Counsel, filed by Plaintiff Ruth Burgoa’s counsel Kevin Crockett of Crockett Law Group, LLP, is GRANTED.

Moving counsel to give notice.