Judge: Lee S. Arian, Case: BC720067, Date: 2023-12-04 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: BC720067    Hearing Date: December 4, 2023    Dept: 27

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - CENTRAL DISTRICT

Defendant’s attorney of record, Brian P. Kamel, seeks to be relieved because there has been an irreparable breakdown of the attorney-client relationship. Moreover, a conflict of interest arose between the client and attorney.

Fos a Motion to Withdraw, California Rule of Court, rule 3.1362 requires (1) a notice of motion and motion to be directed to the client; (2) a declaration stating in general terms the basis for the withdrawal, without compromising the confidentiality of the attorney-client relationship; (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. Counsel’s Motion complies with California Rules of Court, Rule 3.1362. 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.)  Here, trial is currently set for January 24, 2024, with a final status conference and regular status conference on January10, 2024. 

Defendant has not filed an opposition to counsel’s motion.

The Court finds that no prejudice will result to Defendant in granting the Motion because Defendant is a corporation which was given notice of counsel’s intent to withdraw on November 3, 2023.  Further, the dates for trial and final status conference can be changed if necessary to ensure Defendant is not prejudiced by counsel’s withdrawal

Thus, the Court GRANTS Counsel’s Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel upon the filing of a proof of service by Counsel demonstrating that defendant was given notice of this ruling.   Such proof of service and filing of it is ordered to be completed within 7 calendar days of this ruling.

Dated: December 4, 2023