Judge: Jill Feeney, Case: 20STCV32160, Date: 2023-04-03 Tentative Ruling
PLEASE NOTE:
The parties are encouraged to meet and confer concerning this tentative ruling to determine if there is an agreement to submit.
Regardless of whether there is any such agreement, each party who wishes to submit must send an email to the Court at SSCdept30@LACourt.org indicating the party's intention to submit.
Include the word "SUBMITS" in all caps and the case number in the subject line of the email and in the body provide the date and time of the hearing, your name, your contact information, the party you represent, whether that party is a plaintiff, defendant, cross-complainant, cross-defendant, claimant, or non-party.
If a party submits but still intends to appear at the hearing, include the words "SUBMITS BUT WILL APPEAR" in the subject line of the email.
If the Court does not receive emails from the parties indicating submission on this tentative ruling and there are no appearances at the hearing, the Court may, at its discretion, adopt the tentative as the final order or place the motion off calendar.
Unless all the parties have submitted, the Court will hear argument from any party that appears at the hearing and wishes to argue. The Court may change its tentative as a result of the argument and adopt the changed tentative as the final order at the end of that hearing, even if all the parties are not present.
Be advised that after the Court has posted/issued a tentative ruling, the Court has the inherent authority to prohibit the withdrawal of said motion and may adopt the tentative ruling as the order of the Court.
Case Number: 20STCV32160 Hearing Date: April 3, 2023 Dept: 30
Department 30, Spring Street Courthouse
April 3, 2023
20STCV32160
Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel filed by Daniel Azizi and Anthony Werbin, Counsel for Plaintiff David Calderon
DECISION
The motions are denied without prejudice.
Moving party to provide notice.
Background
This is an action for negligence arising from a scooter accident which took place in September 2018. Plaintiff David Calderon filed his Complaint against Defendants Bird Rides, Inc. and Segway, Inc. on August 24, 2020.
On December 16, 2022, Anthony Werbin filed the instant motion to be relieved as counsel.
On January 10, 2023, the Court continued this matter to allow counsel to correct deficiencies with the motion.
On February 9, 2023, the Court again continued this matter to allow counsel to correct deficiencies with the motion.
On March 3 and 6, 2023, Werbin and Daniel Azizi filed new motions to be relieved as counsel.
Summary
Moving Arguments
Counsel Anthony Werbin and Daniel Azizi seek to be relieved as counsel for Plaintiff. Counsel cite a breakdown in attorney-client communication. Counsel have not been able to contact Plaintiff.
Opposing Arguments
None.
Legal Standard
“The question of granting or denying an application of an attorney to withdraw as counsel (Code Civ. Proc., § 284, subd. (2)) is one which lies within the sound discretion of the trial court ‘having in mind whether such withdrawal might work an injustice in the handling of the case.’ [Citation.]” (People v. Prince (1968) 268 Cal.App.2d 398, 406 [internal quotations omitted].) The court should also consider whether the attorney’s “withdrawal can be accomplished without undue prejudice to the client’s interests.” (Ramirez v. Sturdivant (1994) 21 Cal.App.4th 904, 915.)
California Rules of Court, rule 3.1362 requires that the following be submitted in support of an attorney’s Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel pursuant Code of Civil Procedure section 284, subdivision (2): (1) a notice of motion and motion directed to the client (made on Notice of Motion and Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel—Civil (Judicial Council 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, subdivision (2) is brought instead of filing a consent under Code of Civil Procedure section 284, subdivision (1) (made on Declaration in Support of Attorney’s Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel—Civil (Judicial Council Form, MC-052)); (3) a proof of service evidencing service of the notice of motion and motion, declaration, and proposed order on the client and on all other parties who have appeared in the case; and (4) a proposed order relieving counsel (prepared on Order Granting Attorney’s Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel—Civil (Judicial Council Form, MC-053)). (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1362, subd. (a), (c), (d), (e).)
Discussion
The Court previously continued the hearing on this matter because (1) Werbin did not make reasonable efforts to confirm Plaintiff’s address and (2) Plaintiff’s counsel of record, Daniel Azizi, needed to complete the forms.
Werbin and Azizi filed new forms on March 3 and 6, 2023. Their forms still state that they could not confirm that the address was current. (MC-052 Item #3b.) Moreover the forms do not indicate that service has been made. (MC-052, Item 3a.) Counsel attempted to confirm the address by calling Plaintiff’s last known telephone number. (MC-052 Item #3(b)(2).) As before, calling Plaintiff’s last-known telephone number alone is insufficient. Counsel again failed to address this deficiency. The motions are denied without prejudice.
