Judge: Kerry Bensinger, Case: 21STCV25124, Date: 2023-08-16 Tentative Ruling
Case Number: 21STCV25124 Hearing Date: August 16, 2023 Dept: 27
Tentative Ruling
Judge Kerry Bensinger, Department 27
HEARING DATE: August
16, 2023 TRIAL DATE: September 16, 2023
CASE: Maria Barrera v. Hy Cite Corporation, et al.
CASE NO.: 21STCV25124
APPLICATION
FOR ADMISSION PRO HAC VICE
MOVING PARTY: Defendants
Hy Cite Corporation and Hy Cite Enterprises, LLC
RESPONDING PARTY: No opposition
I. BACKGROUND
On July 8, 2021, Plaintiff, Maria Barrera, filed this product
liability action against Defendants, Hy Cite Corporation and Hy Cite
Enterprises, LLC.
On July 11,
2023, Defendants filed this application for admission of Daniel Reisner, to
appear as pro hac vice counsel.
The motion
is unopposed,
II. LEGAL STANDARD
California
Rules of Court rule 9.40 provides that an attorney in good standing in another
jurisdiction may apply to appear as counsel pro hac vice in the State of
California by filing a verified application together with proof of service by
mail of a copy of the application and notice of hearing on all parties who have
appeared in the case and on the State Bar of California at its San Francisco
office, with payment of a $50.00 fee, so long as that attorney is not a
resident of the State of California, and is not regularly engaged in
substantial business, professional, or other activities in the State of
California. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 9.40.)
The
application must state: (1) the applicant’s residence and office addresses; (2)
the courts to which the applicant has been admitted to practice and the dates
of admission; (3) that the applicant is a member of good standing in those
courts; (4) that the applicant is not currently suspended or disbarred in any
court; (5) the title of each court and cause in which the applicant has filed
an application to appear as counsel pro hac vice in this state in the preceding
two years, the date of each application, and whether or not it was granted; and
(6) the name, address, and telephone number of the active member of the State
Bar of California who is attorney of record in the local action. (Cal.
Rules of Court, rule 9.40, subd. (d).)
III. DISCUSSION
Daniel
Reisner seeks a court order allowing him to appear as counsel pro hac vice to
represent Defendants in this action.
The
application generally complies with CRC rule 9.40. However, counsel has
failed to submit evidence or declare under penalty of perjury that he has paid
the $50.00 to the State Bar. In the moving papers, the moving party
states, “ In
addition, a check in the amount of $50.00 has been or will be tendered to the
State Bar at substantially the same time these papers are filed and served.”
This
is not evidence the amount has been paid.
The Court will inquire at the hearing.
IV. CONCLUSION
Based on the foregoing, the application for admission of Daniel
Reisner to appear to the bar of this court pro hac vice is missing proof of
payment of the State Bar fee. The application is otherwise in fine order. The Court will hear from counsel.
Dated: August 16, 2023 ___________________________________
Kerry
Bensinger
Judge
of the Superior Court
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.