Judge Lee S. Arian, Case Number: 21STCV25488, Date: 2024-03-20 Tentative Ruling

Judge: Lee S. Arian, Case: 21STCV25488, Date: 2024-03-20 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 21STCV25488 Hearing Date: March 20, 2024 Dept: 27

Hon. Lee S. Arian¿¿¿¿

Department 27¿¿¿¿

Tentative Ruling¿¿¿

¿¿¿¿

Hearing Date: 3/20/2024 at 1:30 p.m.¿¿¿¿¿¿

Case No./Name.: 21STCV25488 KIANA FURLOW, et al. vs EMILIO MENDEZ PAZ

Motion: MOTION TO BE RELIEVED AS COUNSEL¿¿¿

Moving Party: Plaintiff’s Counsel Michael T. Martin

Responding Party: Unopposed¿¿¿

Notice: Insufficient¿¿¿¿¿¿

¿¿¿¿¿¿

Ruling: MOTION TO BE RELIEVED AS COUNSEL IS DENIED

¿¿¿

Background¿¿¿

¿¿

Plaintiff is currently represented by Attorney Michael T. Martin.

Plaintiff’s counsel moves to be relieved as counsel, citing an irremediable breakdown in the attorney-client relationship and/or communication, which rendered it unreasonably difficult, if not impossible, for Plaintiff's counsel to continue representing Plaintiff No opposition has been filed.¿¿¿

¿¿

Legal Standard¿¿¿

¿¿

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; People v. Prince (1968) 268 Cal.App.2d 398, 403-407.)¿¿¿¿

¿¿

A motion to be relieved as counsel must be made on Judicial Council Form MC-051 (Notice of Motion and Motion), MC-052 (Declaration), and MC-053 (Proposed Order). (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1362, subds. (a), (c), (e).) The requisite forms must be served “on the client and on all parties that have appeared in the case.” (Cal. Rules of Court, Rule 3.1362, subd. (d).)¿¿¿¿

¿¿

Analysis and Conclusion¿¿¿

¿¿

Counsel seeks to be relieved as counsel for Plaintiff on the grounds that there has been a breakdown in the attorney-client relationship. The Court finds this to be proper grounds for withdrawal. A breakdown in the attorney-client relationship is grounds for allowing the attorney to withdraw. (Estate of Falco (1987) 188 Cal.App.3d 1004, 1014.)

However, Defendant's motion is procedurally defective for the following reasons:

1. The proof of service was not lodged 5 days before the hearing.

2. Although Counsel submitted proof of service showing substitute service on 3/13/24 and service by mail on 3/9/24, Plaintiff was not served at least 16 court days before the hearing, as required by CCP § 1005(b).

Furthermore, an Order to Show Cause re DISMISSAL AND SANCTIONS FOR FAILURE TO FILE POS AND FTA is on calendar for March 26, 2024. Plaintiff has insufficient time to bring in new counsel for that hearing. Consequently, the current motion is DENIED without prejudice.

¿¿¿

¿PLEASE TAKE NOTICE:¿¿¿¿¿¿¿¿

¿¿¿¿¿

If a party intends to submit on this tentative ruling,¿the party must send an email to the court at¿sscdept27@lacourt.org¿with the Subject line “SUBMIT” followed by the case number.¿ The body of the email must include the hearing date and time, counsel’s contact information, and the identity of the party submitting.¿¿¿¿¿¿¿¿¿¿

¿¿¿

Unless¿all¿parties submit by email to this tentative ruling, the parties should arrange to appear remotely (encouraged) or in person for oral argument.¿ You should assume that others may appear at the hearing to argue.¿¿¿¿¿¿¿¿¿¿

¿¿¿

If the parties neither submit nor appear at hearing, the Court may take the motion off calendar or adopt the tentative ruling as the order of the Court.¿ After the Court has issued a tentative ruling, the Court may prohibit the withdrawal of the subject motion without leave.¿¿¿¿¿¿¿¿¿

¿¿¿