Judge: Deirdre Hill, Case: 21TRCV00734, Date: 2022-07-26 Tentative Ruling

ALERT

Due to Coronavirus, please consider appearing by phone for Department M cases.

 

Department M strongly encourages the use of  LA CourtConnect* for ALL hearings, without need for prior approval, unless live testimony by a witness is required.

 

The contact information for LA CourtConnect* is:

 

 

 https://lacourt.portalscloud.com/VCourt/

 

 

*Parties with a fee waiver on file may be eligible to appear at no/reduced cost


Dept. M issues tentative rulings in many, but not all motion hearings. There is no set time at which tentatives are posted. Please do not call the staff to inquire if a tentative will be posted. 

If parties are satisfied with the ruling, parties may submit on the tentative. However, if an opposing party does not submit, they will be permitted to argue. Please check with the other side before calling the courtroom to submit. The staff does not keep track of which parties submitted and which did not, so please do not ask. 

If a matter is also a scheduling hearing (CMC, TSC, OSC etc) an appearance is still required even if a party submits on the tentative ruling.



Case Number: 21TRCV00734    Hearing Date: July 26, 2022    Dept: M

Superior Court of California

County of Los Angeles

Southwest District

Torrance Dept. M

 

ELHAM SHAFIEE,

 

 

 

Plaintiff,

 

Case No.:

 

 

21TRCV00734

 

vs.

 

 

[Tentative] RULING

 

 

KINECTA CREDIT UNION, et al.,

 

 

 

Defendants.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Hearing Date:                          July 26, 2022

 

Moving Parties:                      Attorney Stanley D. Bowman, counsel for plaintiff Elham Shafiee

Responding Party:                  None

Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel

 

The court considered the moving papers.

RULING

The motion is GRANTED.  The court orders that the attorney is relieved as counsel of record for plaintiff Elham Shafiee, effective upon the filing of the proof of service of the signed “Order Granting Attorney’s Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel – Civil” (Judicial Council form MC-053) upon the client.

BACKGROUND

On October 7, 2021, plaintiff Elham Shafiee filed a complaint against Kinecta Federal Credit Union, Lawyers Title Company, Ygrene Energy Fund, Inc, and County of Los Angeles for (1) wrongful foreclosure, (2) violation of California Bill of Rights, (3) quiet title, (4) violation of Civil Code §2922, (5) violation of Civil Code §2924.27, and (6) declaratory and injunctive relief. 

            On December 29, 2021, plaintiff filed a FAC against Kinecta Federal Credit Union, Assured Lender Services, Inc., Renovate America Inc., and County of Los Angeles for (1) enjoin foreclosure, (2) violation of Civil Code §2922, (3) violation of Civil Code §2924.17, (6) declaratory relief and injunctive relief, (7) breach of contract, (8) declaratory relief, and (9) violation of Bus. & Prof. Code §17200.

            On January 18, 2022, the court issued a TRO.

            On February 9, 2022, the court did not find good cause to issue a preliminary injunction and dissolved the TRO.  The court found that plaintiff had not met her burden of presenting a likelihood of prevailing on the merits and that the issue of statute of limitations appeared to weigh in favor of defendant based on the plaintiff’s previous knowledge of the loans at issue.

            On March 10, 2022, the court sustained defendant Kinecta’s demurrer without leave to amend as to the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, and 6th causes of action in the FAC and ordered Kinecta to be dismissed with prejudice.

LEGAL STANDARD

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.  See Ramirez v. Sturdevant (1994) 21 Cal. App. 4th 904, 915; People v. Prince (1968) 268 Cal. App. 2d 398.

CRC Rule 3.1362 (Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel) requires (1) notice of motion and motion to be directed to the client (“and must be 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)).

DISCUSSION

            Plaintiff Elham Shafiee’s attorney of record Stanley D. Bowman seeks to be relieved as counsel.

            Counsel Bowman states in his declaration that there has been an irreparable breakdown of the attorney/client relationship.  He notes in an attached letter to the client that “[t]his office can no longer represent you [due] to medical and personal reasons.”

The court finds that the attorney submitted a declaration establishing that the service requirements of California Rules of Court, Rule 3.1362, have been satisfied.  The court also finds that the attorney has shown sufficient reasons why the motion to be relieved as counsel should be granted and why the attorney has brought a motion under CCP §284(2) instead of filing a consent under §284(1).

The motion is GRANTED.

Moving counsel is ordered to give notice of this ruling.