Judge: Kerry Bensinger, Case: 21STCV04500, Date: 2023-02-10 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 21STCV04500    Hearing Date: February 10, 2023    Dept: 27

 

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - CENTRAL DISTRICT

 

MEI LING,

                   Plaintiff,

          vs.

 

CITY OF LOS ANGELES, et al.,

 

                   Defendants.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

     CASE NO.: 21STCV04500

 

[TENTATIVE] ORDER RE: MOTION TO BE RELIEVED AS COUNSEL

 

Dept. 27

1:30 p.m.

February 10, 2023

 

I.            DISCUSSION

Shaun Bauman, attorney of record for Plaintiff Mei Ling, seeks to be relieved as counsel on grounds there has been “significant breakdown in communication between Plaintiff and counsel, rendering it extremely difficult” to continue in representing Plaintiff.  Counsel also states that Plaintiff have had “very limited communication … over the last 120 days” and prior to this period, counsel and Plaintiff had “a difference in opinion which was causing irreparable damage to the client-attorney relationship.”  (MC-052, Bauman Decl.)

Absent a showing of resulting prejudice, an attorney’s request for withdrawal should be granted.  (People v. Prince (1968) 268 Cal.App.2d 398, 406.) 

Counsel’s Motion complies with California Rules of Court, Rule 3.1362.  The Court notes that trial in this matter is currently set for April 18, 2023 and no prejudice will result from granting this motion.  Accordingly, this unopposed motion to be relieved is GRANTED and effective upon filing a proof of service showing service of this Order on Plaintiff and all parties who have appeared.

II.          CONCLUSION

Counsel Shaun Bauman’s motion is 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 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 10th day of February 2023

 

 

 

 

Hon. Kerry Bensinger

Judge of the Superior Court