Judge Lee W. Tsao, Case Number: 23NWCV02754, Date: 2023-12-01 Tentative Ruling

Judge: Lee W. Tsao, Case: 23NWCV02754, Date: 2023-12-01 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 23NWCV02754 Hearing Date: January 16, 2024 Dept: C

Gia Development, LLC vs SC Realty Holdings II LLC, et al.

Case No.: 23NWCV02754

Hearing Date: 1/16/2024 at 9:30 AM

Tentative Ruling

Counsel Omar Gastelum’s Motion to be Relieved as Counsel as to Plaintiff Gia Development, LLC is DENIED without prejudice.

Plaintiff’s Counsel to give notice.

Background

This breach of contract case involves an alleged agreement regarding the purchase of property.

Legal Standard

“The question of granting or denying an application of an attorney to withdraw as counsel (Code Civ. Proc., § 284, subd. (2)) is one which lies within the sound discretion of the trial court ‘having in mind whether such withdrawal might work an injustice in the handling of the case.’ [Citation.]” (People v. Prince (1968) 268 Cal.App.2d 398, 406 [internal quotations omitted].) The court should also consider whether the attorney’s “withdrawal can be accomplished without undue prejudice to the client’s interests.” (Ramirez v. Sturdivant (1994) 21 Cal.App.4th 904, 915.)

Good cause exists to grant the motion based on any of the grounds under Rules of Professional Conduct Rule 3-700(C). Rule 3-700(c) provides that an attorney may withdraw based on any of the following: (1) The client (a) insists upon presenting a claim or defense that is not warranted under existing law and cannot be supported by good faith argument for an extension, modification, or reversal of existing law, or (b) seeks to pursue an illegal course of conduct, or (c) insists that the member pursue a course of conduct that is illegal or that is prohibited under these rules or the State Bar Act, or (d) by other conduct renders it unreasonably difficult for the member to carry out the employment effectively, or (e) insists, in a matter not pending before a tribunal, that the member engage in conduct that is contrary to the judgment and advice of the member but not prohibited under these rules or the State Bar Act, or (f) breaches an agreement or obligation to the member as to expenses or fees. (2) The continued employment is likely to result in a violation of these rules or of the State Bar Act; or (3) the inability to work with co-counsel indicates that the best interests of the client likely will be served by withdrawal; or (4) The member's mental or physical condition renders it difficult for the member to carry out the employment effectively; or (5) The client knowingly and freely assents to termination of the employment; or (6) The member believes in good faith, in a proceeding pending before a tribunal, that the tribunal will find the existence of other good cause for withdrawal.

Discussion

Counsel Omar Gastelum seeks to be relieved as counsel for Plaintiff Gia Development, LLC.

Counsel’s Declaration fails to specify good cause in accordance with the Rules of Professional Conduct, Rule 3-700(C).

Therefore, the Motion to be Relieved as Counsel is DENIED without prejudice.

Counsel may supplement his declaration at the hearing on the motion.