Judge: John J. Kralik, Case: 22STCV19090, Date: 2024-05-03 Tentative Ruling

Counsel who wish to submit on the tentative ruling may do so by emailing BURDeptB@lacourt.org

PLEASE WRITE THE CASE NUMBER AND PARTY YOU REPRESENT.  YOU MAY ONLY SUBMIT ON BEHALF OF THE PARTY YOU REPRESENT.  YOU MAY NOT SUBMIT ON BEHALF OF ANOTHER PARTY. Counsel are directed to cc all other counsel if you are submitting on the tentative ruling.

IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS OR NEED CLARIFICATION ON THE TENTATIVE, YOU MUST APPEAR AND ADDRESS YOUR QUESTIONS TO THE COURT.

IF BOTH SIDES SUBMIT ON THE TENTATIVE RULING, THE TENTATIVE RULING THEN BECOMES THE ORDER OF THE COURT ON THE MOTION DATE AND NO APPEARANCES ARE NECESSARY.

THERE WILL BE NO RESPONSES TO ANY INQUIRIES SUBMITTED THROUGH THIS SITE.

Warning regarding electronic appearances:    All software for remote or electronic appearances is subject to malfunction based on system weakness and human error, which can originate from any of the multiple parties participating each morning. The seamless operation of the Court’s electronic appearance software is dependent on numerous inconstant and fluctuating factors that may impact whether you, or other counsel or the Court itself can be heard in a particular case. Not all these factors are within the control of the courtroom staff. For example, at times, the system traps participants in electronic purgatories where they cannot be heard and where the courtroom staff is not aware of their presence. If you call the courtroom, please be respectful of the fact that a court hearing is going on, and that the courtroom staff is doing their best to use an imperfect system. If it is truly important to you to be heard, please show up to the courtroom in the normal way. Parking is free or reasonable in Burbank.

THANK YOU!

Case Number: 22STCV19090    Hearing Date: May 3, 2024    Dept: NCB

Superior Court of California

County of Los Angeles

North Central District

Department B

Plaintiff’s counsel, Alfred O. Anyia of the Law Offices of Alfred O. Anyia (“Counsel”), moves to be relieved as counsel for Plaintiff Kingsley C. Ukonu (“Plaintiff”). 

Counsel filed this instant motion to be relieved as counsel on November 13, 2023.  Counsel has filed the requisite forms pursuant to CRC Rule 3.1362.  However, the MC-053 proposed order form was rejected by the clerk of the court as it did not properly fill out Item 6. 

According to the declaration of Counsel, Counsel seeks to be relieved as counsel because Plaintiff passed away on August 19, 2022 and the administrators of the estate have declined to proceed with the case.  (MC-052, §2.)  For these reasons, Counsel seeks to withdraw from representing Plaintiff in this action. 

Counsel properly served Plaintiff’s administrators at their email addresses, which was confirmed by contacting the administrators (Michelle Quillen and Erika Ochoa) of the estate of the deceased Plaintiff within the past 30 days of filing the motion.  

As for future hearing dates, a Case Management Conference is set for July 2, 2024.  Thus, there is sufficient time for Plaintiff’s administrators to obtain substitute counsel if they intend to proceed with this action.

Accordingly, the motion to be relieved as counsel is granted.  The Order to be Relieved as counsel was rejected because counsel failed to complete number 6 on the form.  Counsel  must  electronically file a corrected Order to be signed by the Court.  The order will become effective upon the filing of a proof of service of a signed copy of the order on Plaintiff’s administrators. 

Notice to be provided by Counsel.

DATED: May 3, 2024                                                                        ___________________________

                                                                                          John J. Kralik

                                                                                          Judge of the Superior Court