Judge: Kerry Bensinger, Case: 23STCV04750, Date: 2024-08-05 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 23STCV04750    Hearing Date: August 5, 2024    Dept: 31

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - CENTRAL DISTRICT

I.                   INTRODUCTION

This action arises from alleged uninhabitable conditions at a property located at 940 Magnolia Ave., Los Angeles, CA 90006 (the “Property”).

On March 3, 2023, Plaintiffs Juan Luis Lopez Aguilar; Lidia Andrea Lara Morales; Richard Matthew Lopez Lara, a minor by and through his guardian ad litem Lidia Andrea Lara Morales; Juan Luiz Lopez Aguilar Jr., a minor by and through his guardian ad litem Lidia Andrea Lara Morales; Melanie Amayrani Lopez Lara, a minor by and through her guardian ad litem Lidia Andrea Lara Morales; and Jonathan Yahve Lopez Lara, a minor by and through his guardian ad litem Lidia Andrea Lara Morales (collectively “Plaintiffs”) filed a Complaint against Defendant 940 Magnolia LLC (“Defendant”) alleging causes of action for: (1) Breach of Implied Warranty of Habitability; (2) Breach of Statutory Warranty of Habitability; (3) Breach of the Covenant of Quiet Enjoyment; (4) Negligence; (5) Violation of Civ. Code § 1942.4; (6) Private Nuisance; and (7) Violation of Tenant Anti-Harassment Ordinance.

On May 25, 2023, Defendant filed an Answer to the Complaint.

On July 6, 2023, a Substitution of Attorney was filed and served indicating that Joshua Bordin-Wosk was Defendant’s former legal representative and that Defendant’s new legal representative is Leonard S. Kirschen of Stratman & Williams-Abrego.

On August 21, 2023, Defendant filed a Notice of Change of Firm Name and Handling Attorney indicating that the attorneys of record for Defendant have changed its firm name from Stratman & Williams-Abrego to Law Offices of Scott C Stratman effective immediately. The Notice of Change of Firm Name and Handling Attorney was served on all parties on August 19, 2023.

On April 16, 2024, Friedman & Chapman, LLP (“Counsel”) filed and served a Motion to be Relieved as Counsel for Plaintiff Juan Luis Lopez Aguilar (“Mr. Aguilar”).

II.                LEGAL STANDARD

The court may order that an attorney be changed or substituted at any time before or after judgment or final determination upon request by either client or attorney and after notice from one to the other. (Code of Civ. Proc., § 284(2).) “The determination whether to grant or deny a motion to withdraw as counsel lies within the sound discretion of the trial court.” (Manfredi & Levine v. Superior Court (1998) 66 Cal.App.4th 1128, 1133.)  

 An application to be relieved as counsel must be made on Judicial Counsel Form MC-051 (Notice of Motion and Motion) (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1362(a)), MC-052 (Declaration) (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1362(c)), and MC-053 (Proposed Order) (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1362(e)). The proposed order must specify all hearing dates scheduled in the action or proceeding, including the date of trial, if known.  (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1362(e).)

 Further, the requisite forms must be served on the client and all other parties who have appeared in the case. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1362(d).) The court may delay the effective date of the order relieving counsel until proof of service of a copy of the signed order on the client has been filed with the court. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1362(e).) A motion to withdraw will not be granted where withdrawal would prejudice the client. (Ramirez v. Sturdevant (1994) 21 Cal.App.4th 904, 915.) 

III.             DISCUSSION

Roy Diaz of Friedman & Chapman, LLP declares that there has been a lack of communication with Mr. Aguilar and Mr. Aguilar has not been cooperative. (Form MC-052; Diaz Decl., ¶ 5.) Counsel has tried to contact Mr. Aguilar repeatedly by telephone and by mail since November 2023 without any response. (Diaz Decl., ¶ 3.) Mr. Diaz’s office staff contacted Mr. Aguilar’s previous partner and his partner stated that she did not know of his whereabouts and does not have any current contact information. (Diaz Decl., ¶ 4.) In the last mail correspondence to Mr. Aguilar, which was sent on March 27, 2024, Counsel advised him that if they did not hear back from him by April 3, 2024, then they would file a motion to withdraw. (Diaz Decl., ¶ ¶ 3, 5.) Due to the lack of cooperation and communication with Mr. Aguilar, Mr. Diaz’s office is unable to provide discovery responses and is now seeking to be relieved as counsel of record. (Diaz Decl., ¶ 7.)  

Upon review the court finds that the Motion complies with California Rules of Court, rule 3.1362.

IV.             CONCLUSION

Accordingly, the unopposed Motion is GRANTED and effective upon the filing of the proof of service of this signed order upon Plaintiff Juan Luis Lopez Aguilar.

Friedman & Chapman, LLP is ordered to give notice.

            Dated this 5th day of August 2024