Judge: Frank M. Tavelman, Case: 20BBCV00699, Date: 2022-08-19 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 20BBCV00699    Hearing Date: August 19, 2022    Dept: A

ALLEGATIONS:

Arka Construction, Inc., a California Corporation ("Plaintiff") filed suit against 16675 Paramount, LLC, a California Limited Liability Corporation ("Defendant") alleging that Defendant breached a contract for construction services and materials between the parties.

Plaintiff filed a Complaint on October 14, 2020, alleging nine causes of action: (1) Breach of Written Contract; (2) Violation of California's Prompt Payment Statutes; (3) Breach of the Implied Covenant of Good Faith and Fair Dealing; (4) Indebitatus Assumpsit; (5) Account Stated; (6) Open Book Account; (7) Quantum Meruit; (8) Foreclosure of Mechanic Lien; and (9) Declaratory Relief.

PRESENTATION:

The Court received the Motion to be Relieved as Counsel, filed by Sepehr Omrani, Esq., counsel for Defendant (“Mr. Omrani”), on July 26, 2022. The Court has not received any opposition or reply.

RELIEF REQUESTED:

Mr. Omrani moves to be relieved as counsel for Defendant.

ANALYSIS:

I.          LEGAL STANDARD

Under CRC Rule 3.1362, an attorney seeking to withdraw by motion rather than by consent of the client, as here, is required to make that motion using approved Judicial Council forms. The motion also requires a declaration stating “in general terms, and without compromising the confidentiality of the attorney-client relationship why a motion under CCP § 284(2) is brought instead of filing a consent under CCP § 284(1).” (CRC Rule 3.1362(c).) Judicial Council form MC-052, the attorney’s declaration, requires that the client be provided no less than five days’ notice before hearing on the motion. A proposed order prepared on form MC-053 must also be lodged with the court with the moving papers.

The Court of Appeals has recognized, “A lawyer violates his or her ethical mandate by abandoning a client, or by withdrawing at a critical point and thereby prejudicing the client’s case. We are, however, aware of no authority preventing an attorney from withdrawing from a case when withdrawal can be accomplished without undue prejudice to the client’s interests.” (Ramirez v. Sturdevant (1994) 21 Cal. App. 4th 904, 915 [citations omitted].)

II.        MERITS

Mr. Omrani represents that there has been a breakdown in the attorney-client relationship, that the client has failed to comply with the terms and conditions of his contract with counsel, and that the client has declined to sign a substitution of attorney form. (Decl. Omrani.)

III.       CONCLUSION

The Court grants the instant motion.