Hon. Lee S. Arian, Dept 27¿ 

¿¿ 

MOTION TO BE RELIEVED AS COUNSEL¿¿ 

Hearing Date: 6/10/2024 at 1:30 p.m.¿¿ 

CASE NO./NAME: 21STCV36962 JENNIFER CHEN vs JASON RAICH 

Moving Party: Plaintiff’s Counsel David Berke¿¿ 

Responding Party: Unopposed¿¿ 

Notice: Sufficient¿¿ 

 

Ruling: The Court Will Hear from the Parties 

 

Background¿ 

¿ 

Attorney David Berke represents Plaintiff. Berke moves to be relieved as counsel, citing an irremediable breakdown in the attorney-client communication and material breach of retainer agreement. 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¿¿ 

¿¿ 

Berke has filed Judicial Council Form MC-051 (Notice of Motion and Motion), MC-052 (Declaration), and MC-053 (Proposed Order). Berke seeks to be relieved as counsel for Plaintiff on the grounds that there has been a breakdown in the attorney-client relationship or communication. The Court finds this to be proper grounds for withdrawal. (See Estate of Falco (1987) 188 Cal.App.3d 1004, 1014 (a breakdown in the attorney-client relationship or communication is grounds for allowing the attorney to withdraw).)¿Breach of a material term of an agreement with the lawyer is also grounds for withdraw. (California Rules of Professional Conduct, Rule 1.16(b) (5).) 

¿¿ 

The Court notes that the next hearing is an FSC set for 9/30/24, which should be sufficient time for Plaintiff to retain new counsel. Alternatively, if Plaintiff or new counsel needs additional time to prepare for trial, sufficient time exists for Plaintiff to take action to seek a continuance of the trial. However, the court notes that the motion and its related documents were served on Plaintiff through electronic service. Although this is permissible under California Rules of Court Rule 3.1362(d)(2), the motion lacks a declaration stating whether the electronic service address used is current, meaning that the address was confirmed within 30 days before the filing of the motion to be relieved. Merely demonstrating that the notice was sent to the client's last known address and was not returned or no electronic delivery failure message was received is not, by itself, sufficient to demonstrate that the address is current. The Court will hear from counsel whether Plaintiff’s email address used for service is “current.” 

¿¿¿¿¿¿¿¿ 

¿¿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.