Judge: Joel L. Lofton, Case: 23AHCV01487, Date: 2024-06-05 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 23AHCV01487    Hearing Date: June 5, 2024    Dept: X

   Tentative Ruling

Judge Joel L. Lofton, Department X

HEARING DATE:      June 5, 2024                                        TRIAL DATE: March 18, 2025

CASE:                         PAUL LEUS vs ALEX VARTANIAN, et al.

CASE NO.:                 23AHCV01487

MOTION TO BE RELIEVED AS COUNSEL

MOVING PARTY:               Logan Quirk, Esq.

RESPONDING PARTY:      No response filed.

SERVICE:                              Filed May 8, 2024

RELIEF REQUESTED

            Logan Quirk, Esq. moves to be relieved as counsel of record for Plaintiff Paul Leus.

BACKGROUND

            On June 29, 2023, Plaintiff Paul Leus filed a complaint against Defendants Alex Vartanian, Allen Patatanyan, and Does 1-50, alleging, (1) motor vehicle negligence; and (2) general negligence.

TENTATIVE RULING

            Counsel’s motion to be relieved as counsel is tentatively GRANTED.

LEGAL STANDARD

Code of Civil Procedure §284(1) allows for a change or substitution of attorney “[u]pon the consent of both client and attorney, filed with the clerk, or entered upon the minutes.” If both parties do not consent to a substitution of attorney, Code of Civ. Proc. §284(2) allows for a substitution “[u]pon the order of the court, upon the application of either client or attorney, after notice from one to the other.” California Rules of Court Rule 3.1362 sets forth procedures for relieving counsel without the mutual consent of both parties.

Under California Rules of Court Rule 3.1362, an attorney seeking to withdraw by motion rather than by consent of the client, as here, is required to make that motion using approved Judicial Council forms. The motion also requires 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(2) is brought instead of filing a consent under Code of Civil Procedure section 284(1).” (Cal. Rules of Ct., Rule 3.1362(c).)  Judicial Council form MC-052, the attorney’s declaration, requires that the client be provided no less than five days’ notice before hearing on the motion.  A proposed order prepared on form MC-053 must also be lodged with the court with the moving papers.

            California Rules of Court Rule 3.1362 subd. (d) also requires that the motion, notice of motion, the declaration, and the proposed order must be served on the client and all other parties who have appeared in the case. The notice served on the client by mail must be accompanied by a declaration stating facts that show that either the service address is current or “that [t]he service address is the last known residence or business address of the client and the attorney has been unable to locate a more current address after making reasonable efforts to do so within 30 days before the filing of the motion to be relieved.” (California Rules of Court Rule 3.1362 subd. (d)).

The Court of Appeals has recognized, “A lawyer violates his or her ethical mandate by abandoning a client [citation], or by withdrawing at a critical point and thereby prejudicing the client’s case.  [Citation.]  We are, however, aware of no authority preventing an attorney from withdrawing from a case when withdrawal can be accomplished without undue prejudice to the client’s interests.” (Ramirez v. Sturdevant (1994) 21 Cal. App. 4th 904, 915.)

DISCUSSION

            Counsel move to be relieved as counsel of record, stating: “Attorney and client have had a breakdown in communication about the case to the point where Counsel can no longer render representation on the client’s behalf. Attorney’s attempted to telephone client about deposition 4.4.24, 3.27.24, 3.8.24, and 3.7.24, all of which have been unsuccessful. Client was provided a

substitution of attorney certified mail 4.5.24. Client to date has not returned the substitution of attorney.” (Decl. ¶ 2.) Rule 1.16(b)(4) provides that a lawyer may withdraw if “the client by other conduct renders it unreasonably difficult for the lawyer to carry out the representation effectively.”

            Counsel provides that the client was served at the last known address, but he was unable to confirm that the address was current or to locate a more current address for the client after making the following efforts: mailing the motion papers to the client’s last known address, return receipt requested, calling the client’s last known telephone number or numbers, and emailing client.

            The Court notes that proof of service has not been filed. Thus, the Court will delay the effective date of the order relieving counsel until (1) proof of service of a copy of the signed order on the client and (2) proof that the client has been properly served with notice of the next trial date have been filed with the Court.

CONCLUSION

            Counsel’s motion to be relieved as counsel is tentatively GRANTED.

            Moving Party to give notice.

Dated:   June 5, 2024                                      ___________________________________

                                                                                    Joel L. Lofton

                                                                                    Judge of the Superior Court

Parties who intend to submit on this tentative must send an email to the court indicating their

intention to submit.  alhdeptx@lacourt.org