Judge: Lynette Gridiron Winston, Case: 20PSCV00629, Date: 2025-02-05 Tentative Ruling
Case Number: 20PSCV00629 Hearing Date: February 5, 2025 Dept: 6
CASE NAME: Maria Martinez, et al. v. Efrain Moreno, et al.
2. James F. Drake IV’s Motion to be Relieved as Counsel for Plaintiff Maria Martinez
TENTATIVE RULING
The Court DENIES the motions of James F. Drake IV to be relieved as counsel for Plaintiffs Eduardo Jimenez and Maria Martinez without prejudice unless Counsel provides proof of service on all parties. If such proof is provided, Counsel would need to submit fully completed proposed Orders prior to the hearing.
Counsel is ordered to give notice of the Court’s ruling within five calendar days of this order.
BACKGROUND
This is a rental dispute. On September 28, 2020, plaintiffs Eduardo Jimenez and Maria Martinez (collectively, Plaintiffs) filed this action against defendants Efrain Moreno, Ofelia Moreno, Gabriel Aguilar, and Does 1 through 50, alleging causes of action for breach of contract, breach of covenant of good faith and fair dealing, breach of covenant of quiet enjoyment of the premises, trespass, nuisance, intentional infliction of emotional distress, negligent infliction of emotional distress, negligence, wrongful eviction, constructive eviction, and uncured building violations.
On January 15, 2024, James F. Drake IV of Drake Legal Group moved to be relieved as counsel for Plaintiffs. The motions are unopposed.
LEGAL STANDARD
The Court has discretion to allow an attorney to withdraw, and such a motion should be granted, provided that there is no prejudice to the client, and it does not disrupt the orderly process of justice. (See Ramirez v. Sturdevant (1994) 21 Cal.App.4th 904, 915; People v. Prince (1968) 268 Cal.App.2d 398, 403-407.)
A motion to be relieved as counsel must be made on Judicial Council Form MC-051 (Notice of Motion and Motion), MC-052 (Declaration), and MC-053 (Proposed Order). (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1362, subds. (a), (c), (e).) The requisite forms must be served “on the client and on all parties that have appeared in the case.” (Cal. Rules of Court, Rule 3.1362, subd. (d).)
DISCUSSION
James F. Drake IV of Drake Legal Group (Counsel) seeks to be relieved as counsel for Plaintiffs on the grounds that there has been a communication breakdown, such that Counsel is unable to communicate with Plaintiffs. (Drake Decl., Ex. 2.) The Court finds this proper grounds for withdrawal. Grounds for permitting an attorney to withdraw from representation include the client’s conduct that, “renders it unreasonably difficult for the lawyer to carry out the representation effectively[.]” (Cal. Rules of Professional Conduct, rule 1.16, subd. (b)(4).) A breakdown in the attorney-client relationship is also grounds for allowing the attorney to withdraw. (Estate of Falco (1987) 188 Cal.App.3d 1004, 1014.) Counsel has also submitted the application, declaration, and proposed order on Judicial Council forms MC-051, MC-052, and MC-053. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1362, subds. (a), (c), (e).)
However, Counsel did not serve the moving papers and related documents on the other parties in this action, as there is no proof of service on file indicating such service. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1362, subd. (d) [moving papers must be served on client and all parties who have appeared in the action].) The proposed orders are also almost entirely blank. (Proposed Orders (1/15/25); see Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1362, subd. (e).)
Based on the foregoing, the Court DENIES the motions without prejudice.
CONCLUSION
The Court DENIES the motions of James F. Drake IV to be relieved as counsel for Plaintiffs Eduardo Jimenez and Maria Martinez without prejudice unless Counsel provides proof of service on all parties. If such proof is provided, Counsel would need to submit fully completed proposed Orders prior to the hearing.
Counsel is ordered to give notice of the Court’s ruling within five calendar days of this order.