Judge: Jill Feeney, Case: 21STCV40426, Date: 2022-10-14 Tentative Ruling
Case Number: 21STCV40426 Hearing Date: October 14, 2022 Dept: 30
Department 30, Spring Street Courthouse
October 14, 2022
21STCV40426
Motion to be Admitted Pro Hac Vice filed by Defendant/Cross-Defendant/Cross-Complainant, Gossamer Fourteen, LLC
DECISION
The motion is granted.
Moving party is to provide notice.
Background
This is an action for statutory liability under Government Code 830(a) and premises liability arising from a trip and fall incident which took place in November 2019. Plaintiff Oscar Castaneda filed his Complaint against the City of Los Angeles, Cathay Village Condominium Owner’s Association, Inc., and Gossamer Fourteen, LLC on November 3, 2021.
On September 13, 2022, Defendant Gossamer Fourteen, LLC filed its motion to admit Daniel Sarther as Counsel Pro Hac Vice.
Summary
Moving Arguments
Gossamer Fourteen seeks a court order permitting Daniel Sarther to appear pro hac vice to represent Gossamer Fourteen in this action.
Opposing Arguments
None filed.
Legal Standard
CRC Rule 9.40 provides that an attorney in good standing in another jurisdiction may apply to appear as counsel pro hac vice in the State of California by filing a verified application together with proof of service by mail of a copy of the application and notice of hearing on all parties who have appeared in the case and on the State Bar of California at its San Francisco office, with payment of a $50.00 fee, so long as that attorney is not a resident of the State of California, and is not regularly engaged in substantial business, professional, or other activities in the State of California.
The application must state: (1) the applicant’s residence and office addresses; (2) the courts to which the applicant has been admitted to practice and the dates of admission; (3) that the applicant is a member in good standing in those courts; (4) that the applicant is not currently suspended or disbarred in any court; (5) the title of each court and cause in which the applicant has filed an application to appear as counsel pro hac vice in this state in the preceding two years, the date of each application, and whether or not it was granted; and (6) the name, address, and telephone number of the active member of the State Bar of California who is attorney of record in the local action. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 9.40(d).)
Discussion
Applications to appear as counsel pro hac vice must contain the facts specified in Cal. Rules of Court, rule 9.40(d). The application contains the following information about Attorney Sarther:
(1) office address (Sarther Decl., ¶1.)
(2) the courts to which he has been admitted (Id., ¶2.)
(3) evidence that he is a member in good standing in Illinois (Id., ¶2.)
(4) evidence he is not suspended or disbarred in any state (Id., ¶3.)
(5) title of this court and the cause of action he has applied to appear in (Id., Cover Page)
(6) evidence that he has not appeared as counsel pro hac vice in California in the past two years (Id., ¶4.)
Attorney Sarther is not a resident of California, nor is he employed or regularly engaging in business in California. He has not appeared as counsel pro hac vice in California in the past two years. Gossamer Fourteen’s application was properly served on the California State Bar and includes a receipt showing Defendant paid the $50 fee. (Motion, Proof of Service; Hall Decl., ¶4.) Gossamer Fourteen also properly served all parties who have appeared in the action.
Although Nathan A. Hall, the California attorney on record in the local action, provides a declaration in support of this application, he fails to include his address and telephone number as required by California Rule of Court 9.40(d)(6). However, since Mr. Hall has appeared in this matter, this application will be deemed sufficient.
