Judge: Jill Feeney, Case: 22STCV02193, Date: 2022-10-17 Tentative Ruling
Case Number: 22STCV02193 Hearing Date: October 17, 2022 Dept: 30
Department 30, Spring Street Courthouse
October 14, 2022
22STCV02193
Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel filed by Mark Lau, Counsel for Plaintiff Wilson Banegas
DECISION
The motion is granted.
Counsel is to serve the signed MC-053, including on Plaintiff, and to file proof of service within five court days after the date of this order.
The Court's Ruling and Attorney's relief as Counsel of
record for client is not effective until Proof of Service of the Order signed
by the Court upon the client is filed in this action. Until then, counsel continues to be counsel
of record. Cal. Rules of Court
3.1362(e).
Background
This is an action for negligence and premises liability arising from alleged injuries Plaintiff sustained as a result of defective conditions on Defendants’ premises. Plaintiff Wilson Banegas filed his Complaint against Nvard and Luledzhyan Yervand on January 19, 2022.
On September 21, 2022, Mark Lau filed the instant motion to be relieved as counsel.
Summary
Moving Arguments
Counsel Mark Lau seeks to be relieved as counsel for Plaintiff. Counsel cites a breakdown of the attorney-client relationship and a breakdown in communication. Plaintiff will not voluntarily sign a substitution of attorney.
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
Counsel seeks to be relieved as counsel for Plaintiff Wilson Banegas.
Counsel filed a Notice of Motion and Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel (MC-051), an Order Granting Attorney’s Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel (MC-053), and a Declaration in Support of Attorney’s Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel (MC-052) on the appropriate forms, as outlined within California Rules of Court, rule 3.1362, subdivisions (a), (c), and (e). (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1362, subd. (a), (c), (e).)
Counsel served Plaintiff by mail at his last known address which he confirmed as Plaintiff’s current address by conversation 30 days before filing his motion. (MC-052 Item #3; Lau Decl., ¶4.)
Plaintiff will not be prejudiced if Counsel’s motion is granted. The next hearing in this matter is a final status conference scheduled for July 5, 2023. Trial is set for July 19, 2023. There is sufficient time for Plaintiff to engage new counsel before trial and/or to request a continuance. The Court is satisfied that Counsel has a compelling reason to withdraw as counsel given the breakdown of the attorney-client relationship. (MC-052, Item #2.)
"Order Granting Attorney's Motion to Be Relieved as
Counsel-Civil" is electronically signed by the Court and filed herein this
date for reference.
