TENTATIVE RULING

Plaintiffs Dignity Health, et al.’s Motion for an Order Granting Pro Hac Vice Admission to David A. King Pursuant to California Rules of Court, rule 9.40 is GRANTED. 

Plaintiffs Dignity Health, et al.’s Motion for an Order Granting Pro Hac Vice Admission to N. Adam Dietrich II Pursuant to California Rules of Court, rule 9.40 is GRANTED.

Plaintiffs Dignity Health, et al. to give notice.

REASONING

Counsel who are not active members of the California State Bar and have not been granted permission to appear pro hac vice are prohibited from representing a party in California courts. (Gentis v. Safeguard Bus. Systems, Inc. (1998) 60 Cal.App.4th 1294, 1308.) Counsel licensed in another state may, in the court’s discretion, be permitted to appear as counsel pro hac vice if counsel is associated with an attorney of record who is an active member of the California bar. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 9.40(a).) Appearance pro hac vice is a privilege and not a right under the United States Constitution. (Leis v. Flynt (1979) 439 U.S. 438, 441.) 

An application to appear in California as counsel pro hac vice must state: 

(1) The applicant’s residence and office address;

(2) The courts to which the applicant has been admitted to practice and the dates of admission;

(3) That the applicant is a member in good standing in those courts;

(4) That the applicant is not currently suspended or disbarred in any court;

(5) The title of court and cause in which the applicant has filed an application to appear as counsel pro hac vice in this state in the preceding two years, the date of each application, and whether or not it was granted; and

(6) The name, address, and telephone number of the active member of the State Bar of California who is attorney of record.

(Cal. Rules of Court, rule 9.40(d).) 

David A. King and N. Adam Dietrich II represent that they are members in good standing of all bars and with all courts in which they are admitted to practice, and they have not appeared in any other actions in California in the preceding two years. They have met the requirements of California Rules of Court, rule 9.40(d), they appear qualified and ready to appear pro hac vice, and there are no other facts or circumstances to show that their appearance in this action would cause a significant disruption of orderly justice. Accordingly, Plaintiffs Dignity Health, et al.’s Motion for an Order Granting Pro Hac Vice Admission to David A. King Pursuant to California Rules of Court, rule 9.40 is GRANTED, and Plaintiffs Dignity Health, et al.’s Motion for an Order Granting Pro Hac Vice Admission to N. Adam Dietrich II Pursuant to California Rules of Court, rule 9.40 is GRANTED.