Judge Jill Feeney, Case 21STCV45719 2022-09-08 Tentative Ruling

Department 30, Spring Street Courthouse

Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel for Plaintiff filed by Brett Yorke of the Law Office of Ball & Yorke

The motion is granted.

Counsel is ordered to provide notice and to serve the signed MC-053 on Plaintiff. Counsel is ordered to file proof of service within five court days after the date of this order.

This is an action for negligence and premises liability arising from a slip and fall which took place in March 2021. Plaintiff Margoth Marroquin filed her Complaint against Victory Boulevard Properties, LLC on December 15, 2021.

On July 8, 2022, Plaintiff’s Counsel, Brett Yorke of the Law Office of Ball & Yorke filed the instant motion to be relieved as counsel for Plaintiff Margoth Marroquin. The hearing on the motion was continued on August 8, 2022 to allow Counsel to correct deficiencies in his motion.

Brett Yorke (“Counsel”) seeks to be relieved as counsel for Plaintiff. Previously the Court ordered Counsel to make the following corrections: (1) the MC-051, MC-052 and MC-053 must be separately filed (not filed as one document as they were on 7/8/2022); (2) the Department 30 Spring Street address must be provided for every future hearing and should be listed in the caption as well; and (3) the December 11, 2024 Order to Show Cause re: Dismissal should be removed. The Court also ordered Counsel to file proof of service of such notice within five court days after the date of the order.

Opposing Arguments

“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).)

Counsel filed new papers on August 12, 2022.

1. The MC-051, MC-052 and MC-053 must be separately filed (not filed as one document as they were on 7/8/2022)

Counsel filed a separate form MC-053. Counsel filed forms MC-051 and MC-052 together in one document.

2. The Department 30 Spring Street address must be provided for every future hearing and should be listed in the caption as well.

The Department 30 Spring Street address is now provided for MC-053 Item # 7(a), MC-052 Item # 4, MC-051 Item #2, and in the captions for all three forms.

3. The December 11, 2024 Order to Show Cause re: Dismissal should be removed.

Counsel removed the December 11, 2024 OSC from his new MC-053 and MC-051.

Counsel’s proof of service filed on August 12, 2022 shows Plaintiff and Defendant were both served with notice of this motion.

Counsel has corrected the majority of the deficiencies previously identified. However, Counsel failed to file forms MC-052 and MC-051 separately. Notwithstanding this issue, the motion is granted.