Judge: Lynette Gridiron Winston, Case: 22PSCV01039, Date: 2023-10-13 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 22PSCV01039    Hearing Date: April 9, 2024    Dept: 6

CASE NAME:  Gentle Carman Auto v. Euro M Tech Transmissions, et al. 

Motions to be Relieved as Counsel (x 2) 

TENTATIVE RULING 

The Court GRANTS the motions to be relieved as counsel on the condition that Counsel submits revised proposed orders as described herein. The signed revised orders will become effective upon Counsel filing proofs of service of same upon Defendants. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1362, subd. (e).) 

Counsel is ordered to give notice of this ruling and file proof of service of same within five calendar days. 

BACKGROUND 

This is a breach of contract action. On September 13, 2022, plaintiff Gentle Carman Auto (Plaintiff) filed this action against defendants Euro M Tech Transmissions (Euro), Surong Jiang (collectively, Defendants), and Does 1 through 10. On January 26, 2023, Plaintiff filed the operative First Amended Complaint, alleging causes of action for breach of contract and conversion. On December 7, 2023, default judgment was entered against Defendants. 

On March 11, 2024, Stephen J. Thomas of Thomas Business Law Group (Counsel) filed motions to be relieved as counsel for Defendants. 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 

Counsel seeks to be relieved as counsel for Defendants on the grounds that there has been a complete breakdown in the attorney-client relationship. (Thomas Decls., ¶ 2.) The Court finds this to be sufficient grounds for withdrawal. A breakdown in the attorney-client relationship is grounds for allowing the attorney to withdraw. (Estate of Falco (1987) 188 Cal.App.3d 1004, 1014.) Counsel has also provided the necessary Judicial Council forms per Rule 3.1362, subdivisions (a), (c), and (e) of the California Rules of Court. (Cal Rules of Court, rule 3.1362, subds. (a), (c), (e).) Counsel has also filed proofs of service. (Id., rule 3.1362, subd. (d).) 

The Court notes, however, that paragraph 6 of the proposed orders do not list the Defendants’ current telephone number. (Form MC-053, ¶ 6.) Paragraph 5 of the proposed orders is also not filled in. (Id., ¶ 5.) Paragraph 7.a. of the proposed orders should also read: “None. Default Judgment was entered against Defendants on December 7, 2023.” These can easily be fixed by Counsel submitting revised proposed orders forthwith.

Based on the foregoing, the Court GRANTS the motions to be relieved as counsel on the condition that Counsel submits revised proposed orders addressing the issue identified above. The signed revised orders will become effective upon Counsel filing proofs of service same upon Defendants. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1362, subd. (e).) 

CONCLUSION 

The Court GRANTS the motions to be relieved as counsel on the condition that Counsel submits revised proposed orders as described herein. The signed revised orders will become effective upon Counsel filing proofs of service of same upon Defendants. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1362, subd. (e).) 

Counsel is ordered to give notice of this ruling and file proof of service of same within five calendar days.