Judge Holly J. Fujie, Case Number: 24STCV03814, Date: 2024-06-03 Tentative Ruling

The Court has considered the moving papers. No opposition or reply papers were filed as of May 30, 2024.

On March 4, 2024, Olivia Hussey and Leonard Whiting filed their operative First Amended Complaint against Paramount Pictures Corp., Criterion Collections, Inc., and Janus Films, LLC for: (1) unlawful distribution of intimate photographs; (2) unlawful use of likeness; (3) violation of performers rights act of the United Kingdom; (4) Civil Code section 1708.85(a); and (5) 15 U.S.C. section 6851(b).

On April 3, 2024, attorney Jeffrey D. Ullman filed the instant application to be admitted pro hac vice for Defendants The Criterion Collection, Inc. (s/h/a “Criterion Collections, Inc.”) and Janus Films (s/h/a “Janus Films, LLC”).

CRC, Rule 9.40 provides that an attorney in good standing in another jurisdiction may apply to appear pro hac vice in this State by way of written application upon due notice to all interested parties, as well as service on the State Bar in San Francisco with payment of a $50 fee, provided that the attorney (a) is not a California resident, (b) does not work in California, and (c) does not perform regular or substantial business, professional or other activities in California.

An application for pro hac vice admission must set forth: (1) the applicant attorney’s residence and office addresses; (2) the courts to which the applicant attorney has been admitted and dates of admission; (3) a representation that the attorney applicant is a member in good standing in the courts of admission and is not currently suspended or disbarred in any court; (4) the title of each court and action in which the applicant attorney has appeared pro hac vice in this State in the prior two years; and (5) the name, address and phone number of the active California State Bar member with whom the applicant is associated. (CRC, Rule 9.40(d).)

Under CRC, Rule 9.40(b), “[a]bsent special circumstances, repeated appearances by any person under this rule is a cause for denial of an application.”

Here, Mr. Ullman attests to his residence and his office address, which are both in New Jersey. (Ullman Decl. ¶ 1.) He attests to all the courts to which he has been admitted (with dates of admission) and that he is in good standing with these courts and not currently suspended or disbarred from practice in any court. (Id. at ¶¶ 1-3.) Mr. Ullman submits the name and address of the active California State Bar member with whom the applicant is associated. (Id. at ¶ 4.) He also attests that he has not filed any pro hac vice applications in any California federal or state courts in the last two years. (Id. at ¶ 3.) Further, the requisite fee was paid to the State Bar of California, and the Notice of Hearing and the instant application were served on all interested parties and on the State Bar of California. (Baheri Decl. at ¶¶ 3-4; POS.)

Based on the foregoing, the Court finds that Mr. Ullman establishes that he has satisfied the requirements to appear as counsel pro hac vice pursuant to CRC, Rule 9.40. The Court therefore GRANTS the application.

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.

Hon. Holly J. Fujie

Judge of the Superior Court