Judge: Kerry Bensinger, Case: 19STCV40652, Date: 2023-05-04 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 19STCV40652    Hearing Date: May 4, 2023    Dept: 27

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - CENTRAL DISTRICT

I.         BACKGROUND

          On November 12, 2019, Plaintiff Ruben Hernandez filed this action against Defendants Adim, Inc., Pro Masters Carpet & Upholstery, Art Mejia, and Martin de Jesus Rodriguez arising from a November 12, 2017, motor vehicle collision. On April 30, 2021, Plaintiff dismissed Art Mejia and Pro Master Carpet & Upholstery from the action. On July 13, 2022, Plaintiff dismissed Adam, Inc. from this action.

          On March 23, 2023, the Court continued the Final Scheduling Conference to August 17, 2023 and Jury Trial to August 31, 2023.

On March 14, 2023, Ryne Osborne of Law Offices of Jacob Emrani filed a Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel (hereinafter, “Motion”), moving to be relieved as counsel for Plaintiff. No opposition was filed.

II.      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).)

III.     DISCUSSION

          Ryne Osborne of Law Offices of Jacob Emrani (“Counsel”) has filed a Motion To Be Relieved as Counsel, effectively moving to be relieved as counsel of record for Plaintiff Ruben Hernandez (“Plaintiff”).  Counsel’s request is granted.

          Counsel properly submitted a motion and notice of motion (Form-051), a declaration in support of the motion (Form-052), and a Proposed Order (Form-053) as required by California Rules of Court, rule 3.1362. Counsel also provides proof of service of each form.

          Counsel states that there has been a complete breakdown of the attorney client relationship and lack of necessary cooperation by Plaintiff to prosecute the case, “which is a breach of the material terms/obligations of the retainer agreement.” (Declaration, Section 2.) Additionally, Counsel claims that Plaintiff by other conduct renders it unreasonably difficult for Counsel to carry out the representation effectively. (Id.)

          When this Motion was filed, Jury Trial was scheduled for March 28, 2023. Pursuant to written stipulation, on March 23, 2023, the Jury Trial was continued to August 31, 2023. Therefore, Jury Trial is still roughly three months away. Additionally, pursuant to the March 23 Minute Order, all discovery other than expert discovery remains closed. Therefore, no prejudice will result from granting this motion.

          Based on the foregoing, Counsel’s Motion To Be Relieved as Counsel is GRANTED.

IV.     CONCLUSION

          Ryne Osborne’s Motion To Be Relieved as Counsel is therefore GRANTED.

Moving party to give notice. 

          Parties who intend to submit on this tentative must send an email to the Court at SSCDEPT27@lacourt.org indicating intention to submit on the tentative as directed by the instructions provided on the court’s website at www.lacourt.org.  Please be advised that if you submit on the tentative and elect not to appear at the hearing, the opposing party may nevertheless appear at the hearing and argue the matter.  Unless you receive a submission from all other parties in the matter, you should assume that others might appear at the hearing to argue.  If the Court does not receive emails from the parties indicating submission on this tentative ruling and there are no appearances at the hearing, the Court may, at its discretion, adopt the tentative as the final order or place the motion off calendar.

Dated this 4th day of May 2023