Judge: Kerry Bensinger, Case: 23STCV16584, Date: 2024-04-24 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 23STCV16584    Hearing Date: April 24, 2024    Dept: 31

Tentative Ruling

Judge Kerry Bensinger, Department 31

HEARING DATE:     April 24, 2024                        TRIAL DATE:  Not set

CASE:                         Karen Garush Berkibekyan v. Narek Eric Kazarian, et al.

CASE NO.:                 23STCV16584

MOTION TO BE RELIEVED AS COUNSEL

MOVING PARTY:               R. David DiJulio, DiJulio Law Group

RESPONDING PARTY:     No opposition

I.          INTRODUCTION

On February 28, 2024, R. David DiJulio, counsel for Plaintiff, Karen Garush Berkibekyan, filed this Motion to be Relieved as Counsel.  

The Motion is unopposed.

II.        LEGAL STANDARD 

California Rules of Court, rule 3.1362 (Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel) requires (1) notice of motion and motion to be directed to the client (made on the Notice of Motion and Motion to be Relieved as Counsel—Civil 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(2) is brought instead of filing a consent under Code of Civil Procedure section 284(1) (made on the Declaration in Support of Attorney's Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel—Civil form (MC-052)); (3) service of the notice of motion and motion and declaration on all other parties who have appeared in the case; and (4) the proposed order relieving counsel (prepared on the Order Granting Attorney's Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel—Civil form (MC-053)). 

The court has discretion to allow an attorney to withdraw, and such a motion should be granted provided that there is no prejudice to the client, and it does not disrupt the orderly process of justice.  (See Ramirez v. Sturdevant (1994) 21 Cal.App.4th 904, 915.)  

III.       DISCUSSION 

R. David DiJulio seeks to be relieved as counsel of record for Plaintiff for the following reasons: “Client has failed to communicate with me and has failed to meet his obligations to my firm.”  (Form MC-052.)   

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.)  

Upon review, the court finds that the Motion does not comply with California Rules of Court, rule 3.1362.  Counsel has not submitted a completed proposed order.  Counsel must address Items 3, 5, 6, 7, and 9.

IV.       CONCLUSION        

            Accordingly, the Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel is CONTINUED to May 17, 2024 at 8:30 a.m. to allow Counsel to file a proposed order consistent with this order.  Counsel is to file the amended proposed order no later than 5 court days before the hearing.

            The Status Conference re: Representation of Plaintiff and Trial Setting Conference are CONTINUED to May 17, 2024.

            Counsel to give notice.  

Dated:   April 24, 2024