Judge: Holly J. Fujie, Case: 22STCV04190, Date: 2023-09-13 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 22STCV04190    Hearing Date: September 13, 2023    Dept: 56

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - CENTRAL DISTRICT

MOVING PARTY: G. Cresswell Templeton III (“Templeton”)

The Court has considered the moving papers.  No opposition papers were filed.  Any opposition papers were required to have been filed and served at least nine court days before the hearing under California Code of Civil Procedure section 1005, subdivision (b).

BACKGROUND

            Plaintiffs’ complaint (the “Complaint”) alleges: (1) breach of contract; (2) breach of contract; (3) breach of contract; (4) restitution based on quasi-contract and unjust enrichment; (5) restitution based on quasi-contract and unjust enrichment; (6) rescission; (7) rescission; (8) breach of contract; (9) breach of implied duty of good faith and fair dealing; (10) breach of fiduciary duty; (11) demand under Corporations Code section 17704.10 to obtain tax returns and to inspect records under Corporations Code section 17701.13; (12) breach of contract; (13) restitution based on quasi-contract and unjust enrichment; (14) rescission; (15) breach of implied duty of good faith and fair dealing; (16) breach of fiduciary duty; (17) breach of fiduciary duty; (18) demand under Corporations Code section 17704.10 to obtain tax returns and to inspect records under Corporations Code section 17701.13; (19) fraud; (20) accounting; and (21) account stated.

On August 5, 2022, the Court granted Plaintiffs’ motion to compel arbitration and ordered that Plaintiffs’ claims except for the first, second, and fourth through seventh causes of action be adjudicated in arbitration proceedings.  The Court stayed the balance of the action pending the conclusion of the arbitration. 

On August 16, 2023, following an OSC re: why the case should be reinstated to active calendar for failure to participate in arbitration/failure to follow arbitration rules, the Court issued a minute order setting a trial date for November 5, 2024.  The August 16, 2023 minute order notes that Defendant’s counsel would reserve a hearing date for a motion to be relieved as counsel.

On August 17, 2023, Templeton filed a motion to be relieved as Defendant’s counsel (the “Motion”).  The Motion is compliant with California Rules of Court, rule 3.1362.

DISCUSSION

The court has discretion on whether to allow an attorney to withdraw, and a motion to withdraw will not be granted where withdrawal would prejudice the client.  (Ramirez v. Sturdevant (1994) 21 Cal.App.4th 904, 915.) 

            In support of the Motion, Templeton declares that Defendant has failed to comply with the retainer agreement.  The Court finds this to be an adequate basis for withdrawal.  For this reason and because it is unopposed, the Court GRANTS the Motion.  (Sexton v. Superior Court (1997) 58 Cal.App.4th 1403, 1410.) 

Moving party is ordered to give notice of this ruling.

Parties who intend to submit on this tentative must send an email to the Court at SMC_DEPT56@lacourt.org as directed by the instructions provided on the court website at www.lacourt.org.  If the department does not receive an email and there are no appearances at the hearing, the motion will be placed off calendar. 

         Dated this 13th day of September 2023