Judge: Kerry Bensinger, Case: 23STCV29293, Date: 2025-01-21 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 23STCV29293    Hearing Date: January 21, 2025    Dept: 31

Tentative Ruling

Judge Kerry Bensinger, Department 31

HEARING DATE:     January 21, 2025                               TRIAL DATE:  September 29, 2025

CASE:                         Josue Alberto Maldonado v. Simco Sales, Inc.

CASE NO.:                 23STCV29293

MOTION TO BE RELIEVED AS COUNSEL

MOVING PARTY:               Andrea Pearce, Lawyers for Employee and Consumer Rights

RESPONDING PARTY:     No opposition

I.         INTRODUCTION

On November 20, 2024, Andrea Pearce, counsel for Plaintiff, Josue Alberto Maldonado, 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 

Andrea Pearce seeks to be relieved as counsel of record for Plaintiff for the following reason: “This Motion is made pursuant to CCP section 284(2).  Me and my firm, Lawyers for Employee and Consumer Rights, should be relieved as counsel because (1) the conduct of Plaintiff Alberto Maldonado has rendered it unreasonably difficult for my office and I to carry out our legal representation effectively.  Our office has attempted to contact Plaintiff multiple times.  Plaintiff has failed to respond to our requset (sic) for discovery and requests for contact.  Plaintiff has not been responsive to contact form (sic) my office.”  (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 the Motion complies with California Rules of Court, rule 3.1362. 

IV.       CONCLUSION        

            The unopposed Motion is granted and effective upon the filing of the proof of service of this signed order upon Plaintiff. 

            Counsel to give notice.

Dated:   January 21, 2025