Judge: Lee S. Arian, Case: 20STCV29215, Date: 2023-10-31 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 20STCV29215    Hearing Date: October 31, 2023    Dept: 27

Tentative Ruling

Judge Lee S. Arian, Department 27

HEARING DATE:      October 31, 2023                                         TRIAL DATE:  March 6, 2024

CASE:                                Annabella Rodriguez v. American VIP Limo, Inc., et al.

CASE NO.:                 20STCV29215

MOTION TO BE RELIEVED AS COUNSEL

MOVING PARTY:               Daryl J. Williams, Law Office of Daryl J. Williams

RESPONDING PARTY:     No opposition

I.          INTRODUCTION

On September 5, 2023, Daryl J. Williams, counsel for Plaintiff Annabella Rodriguez, filed this Motion to be Relieved as Counsel.  

The Motion was reviewed on October 4, 2023.  The Court could not grant the Motion because a proposed order on MC-053 had not been submitted nor did counsel include all future hearings in this matter.

On October 11, 2023, Counsel filed an amended Motion.

II.        LEGAL STANDARDS 

California Rule 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 

Daryl J. Williams seeks to be relieved as counsel of record for Plaintiff for the following reason: “Client refused to sign a vonluntary [sic] consent to substitute attorney. I met with her several times at her residence attempting to agree to the substitution and/or sign a conflict of interest waiver, and to cooperate with discovery responses.  She refused to cooperate.  Eventually, days before the original hearing on this matter October 4, 2023, I received the signed waiver of the conflict but absolutely no other communication from the client regarding discovery or settlement issues.  I cannot properly represent Mrs. Rodriguez due to her lack of cooperation and unreasonable settlement demands in this matter.”  (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.).  

Counsel has cured the defects noted in the Court’s previous order.  The Motion complies with the requirements of 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. 

Counsel to give notice. 

Dated:   October 31, 2023                                         ___________________________________

                                                                                    Lee S. Arian

                                                                                    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.