Judge Jill Feeney, Case 22STCV03284 2023-03-13 Tentative Ruling

Department 30, Spring Street Courthouse

Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel filed by Howard A. Goldstein, Counsel for Plaintiffs Irma Rodriguez-Montiel and Avercio Rodriguez

The motion will be granted with respect to Plaintiff Irma Rodriguez-Montiel, pending the appearance of Plaintiff’s Counsel at the hearing and Counsel providing Plaintiff’s phone number at the hearing which the Court will add at Item 6 of the proposed MC-053.

Plaintiff’s counsel is ordered to serve the signed MC-053 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).

This is an action for negligence arising from a vehicle collision which took place in March 2020. Plaintiffs Irma Rodriguez-Montiel and Avercio Rodriguez filed their Complaint against Jasmine Woo, Maria Rakisits, and Sheikh Ahmad Nauman dba Priceless Car Rental on January 27, 2022.

On January 30, 2023, Howard A. Goldstein filed the instant motion to be relieved as counsel.

On February 16, 2023, Plaintiff Avercio Rodriguez filed a substitution of attorney and is now self-represented. Therefore, the Court will only consider the motion as to Plaintiff Irma Rodriguez-Montiel.

Counsel Howard A. Goldstein seeks to be relieved as counsel for Plaintiffs. Counsel cites a breakdown in the attorney-client relationship that renders it unreasonably difficult for counsel to effectively represent Plaintiffs.

“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 seeks to be relieved as counsel for Plaintiffs Irma Rodriguez-Montiel and Avercio Rodriguez. Avercio Rodriguez filed a substitution of attorney in February 2023. The motion is denied as moot as to Avercio Rodriguez.

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 Irma Rodriguez-Montiel by mail at her last known address and confirmed the address by conversation within 30 days before this motion was filed. (MC-052 Item #3.)

Rodriguez-Montiel will not be prejudiced if Counsel’s motion is granted. The next hearing in this matter is a final status conference scheduled for July 13, 2023. Trial is set for July 27, 2023. There is sufficient time for Rodriguez-Montiel to engage new counsel and/or request a continuance before trial. The Court is satisfied that Counsel has a compelling reason to withdraw. (MC-052, Item #2.)

Counsel failed to include Rodriguez-Montiel’s phone number on form MC-053, Item 6. Counsel must provide the phone number before the Court can grant this motion.