Judge: Lisa R. Jaskol, Case: 22STCV06512, Date: 2023-06-20 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 22STCV06512    Hearing Date: October 19, 2023    Dept: 28

Having considered the moving papers, the Court rules as follows. 

BACKGROUND 

On February 22, 2022, Plaintiff Scott Fitzgerald (“Plaintiff”) filed this action against Defendants L3 Harris Technologies, Inc., Roxford XC, LLC, Jeff Shelton, S & S Fabrication LLC, The Racer's Edge, Your Equipment Solutions, and Does 1-20 for motor vehicle negligence, general negligence, and premises liability. 

On February 28, 2022, Plaintiff amended the complaint to add Defendant Alex Miseirvitch as Doe 1.  On March 1, 2022, Plaintiff amended the complaint to add Defendant Cindy Shelton as Doe 2. 

On April 7, 2022, Defendants Jeff Shelton, S & S Fabrication, LLC, and TRE, erroneously sued as The Racer’s Edge, filed an answer. On April 11, 2022, Defendant Alex Miseirvitch filed an answer.  On April 29, 2022, Defendant Roxford XC, LLC filed an answer. 

Also on April 7, 2022, Defendant and Cross-Complainant L3 Harris Technologies, Inc. filed an answer and cross-complaint against Cross-Defendants Jeff Shelton, S & S Fabrication, LLC, The Racer’s Edge, Your Equipment Solutions, and Roes 1-10 for express indemnity, implied indemnity, comparative indemnity, declaratory relief and breach of contract. On May 11, 2022, Cross-Defendants Jeff Shelton, S & S Fabrication, LLC, and The Racer’s Edge filed an answer. 

On June 27, 2022, the Court dismissed Defendant Cindy Shelton without prejudice at Plaintiff’s request. On February 8, 2023, the Court dismissed Roxford XC, LLC, without prejudice at Plaintiff’s request. 

On August 21, 2023, Robert Walters, counsel for Defendants Jeff Shelton, S & S Fabrication, LLC, and TRE, Inc., filed motions to be relieved as counsel, to be heard on October 18, 2023.  No oppositions have been filed. 

Trial is currently scheduled for January 3, 2024. 

COUNSEL’S REQUESTS 

Robert Walters, counsel for Defendants Jeff Shelton, S & S Fabrication, LLC, and TRE, Inc., asks to be relieved as counsel. 

LEGAL STANDARD 

California Rules of Court, rule 3.1362 (Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel) requires (1) notice of motion and motion to be directed to the client (made on the Notice of Motion and Motion to be Relieved as Counsel—Civil form (MC-051)); (2) a declaration stating in general terms and without compromising the confidentiality of the attorney-client relationship why a motion under Code of Civil Procedure section 284(2) is brought instead of filing a consent under Code of Civil Procedure section 284(1) (made on the Declaration in Support of Attorney's Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel—Civil form (MC-052)); (3) service of the notice of motion and motion, declaration, and proposed order on the client and all other parties who have appeared in the case; and (4) the proposed order relieving counsel (prepared on the Order Granting Attorney’s Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel—Civil form (MC-053)). 

The court has discretion to allow an attorney to withdraw.  The motion should be granted if there is no prejudice to the client and it does not disrupt the orderly process of justice. (Ramirez v. Sturdevant (1994) 21 Cal.App.4th 904, 915.) 

DISCUSSION 

“The notice of motion and motion, the declaration, and the proposed order must be served on the client and on all other parties who have appeared in the case.”  (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1362(d).)  The proofs of service here do not show service on Defendant Alex Miseirvitch, who has appeared in the case. 

The Court denies the motions. 

CONCLUSION 

The Court DENIES the motion of Robert Walters to be relieved as counsel for Defendant Jeff Shelton. 

The Court DENIES the motion of Robert Walters to be relieved as counsel for Defendant S & S Fabrication, LLC. 

The Court DENIES the motion of Robert Walters to be relieved as counsel for Defendant TRE, Inc.

Counsel is ordered to give notice of these rulings. 

Counsel is ordered to file the proof of service of these rulings with the Court within five days.