Judge: Lee W. Tsao, Case: 23NWCV00731, Date: 2025-06-03 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 23NWCV00731    Hearing Date: June 3, 2025    Dept: C

SERRANO, et al. v. GENERAL MOTORS, LLC

CASE NO.:  23NWCV00731

HEARING:  06/03/25

JUDGE: LEE W. TSAO

#11

TENTATIVE ORDER

Knight Law Group, LLP’s motion to be relieved as counsel is GRANTED.

Knight Law Group, LLP to give notice.

Background

This is a Song-Beverly Act (lemon law) case. On March 10, 2023, Plaintiffs ALICIA RIVAS SERRANO (“Serrano”) and EFREN HERRERA LOPEZ (“Lopez”) (collectively, “Plaintiffs”) filed a Complaint against Defendant GENERAL MOTORS, LLC (“GM”) and DOES 1 through 10, inclusive, alleging a sole cause of action for Violation of the Song-Beverly Act – Breach of Express Warranty.

On April 21, 2023, GM filed an Answer to the Complaint.

On February 19, 2025, Plaintiffs’ Counsel Knight Law Group, LLP filed the instant motion to be relieved as counsel. The motion is unopposed.

Analysis

Legal Standard re: Motion to be Relieved as Counsel

The court may order that an attorney be changed or substituted at any time before or after judgment or final determination upon request by either client or attorney and after notice from one to the other. (Code Civ. Proc., § 284(2).) “The determination whether to grant or deny a motion to withdraw as counsel lies within the sound discretion of the trial court.” (Manfredi & Levine v. Superior Court (1998) 66 Cal.App.4th 1128, 1133.)    

An application to be relieved as counsel must be made on Judicial Counsel Form MC-051 (Notice of Motion and Motion) (Cal. Rules of Court, Rule 3.1362(a)), MC-052 (Declaration) (Cal. Rules of Court, Rule 3.1362(c)), and MC-053 (Proposed Order) (Cal. Rules of Court, Rule 3.1362(e)). The proposed order must specify all hearing dates scheduled in the action or proceeding, including the date of trial, if known. (Cal. Rules of Court, Rule 3.1362(e).)    

Further, the requisite forms must be served on the client and all other parties who have appeared in the case. (Cal. Rules of Court, Rule 3.1362(d).) The court may delay the effective date of the order relieving counsel until proof of service of a copy of the signed order on the client has been filed with the court. (Cal. Rules of Court, Rule 3.1362(e).) A motion to withdraw will not be granted where withdrawal would prejudice the client. (Ramirez v. Sturdevant (1994) 21 Cal.App.4th 904, 915.) 

          Merits of the Motion

Knight Law Group, LLP (hereinafter, “Counsel”) moves to be relieved as counsel for Plaintiffs Alicia Rivas Serrano (“Serrano”) and Efren Herrera Lopez (“Lopez”) (collectively, “Plaintiffs”). Counsel states there has been a breakdown in the attorney-client relationship. Furthermore, Counsel declares the moving papers have been served on Plaintiffs via mail at their last known address, which Counsel confirmed as current after sending a letter via first-class mail on January 2, 2025. Likewise, all the other parties who have appeared in this case have been served with the moving papers as well. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1362(d).) Moreover, the proposed order includes all hearing scheduled in this action as required by California Rules of Court, Rule 3.1362(e). Specifically, the final status conference is set for February 5, 2026 at 9:30 a.m. and the jury trial is set for February 19, 2026. As such, there will be no prejudice or undue delay if the motion is granted because there is time for Plaintiffs to obtain new counsel.

Conclusion

Based on the foregoing, Knight Law Group, LLP’s motion to be relieved as counsel is GRANTED. The order shall take effect when the proofs of service of the signed order on the clients have been filed with the court.