Judge: Lynette Gridiron Winston, Case: 23PSCV03116, Date: 2023-12-04 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 23PSCV03116    Hearing Date: December 4, 2023    Dept: 6

CASE NAME: Laura Bernal Villegas, et al. v. Pauline Esparza

Motion to be Relieved as Counsel 

TENTATIVE RULING

The Motion to be Relieved as Plaintiffs’ Counsel is GRANTED. 

Counsel is ordered to give notice of this ruling and file proof of service of same within five calendar days of this order. The Court will sign the Proposed Order (Form MC-053). The Court further orders Counsel to serve the signed Order (Form MC-053) upon Plaintiff and file proof of service of same within five calendar days thereof. 

BACKGROUND

This is a personal injury action. On October 9, 2023, plaintiffs Laura Bernal Villegas, Dieter Soza, and Dodi Soza (collectively, Plaintiffs) filed this action against Defendants Pauline Esparza, State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company, and Does 1 to 10, alleging causes of action for general negligence and breach of contract. 

On November 2, 2023, Kelly Ryan, and Jillian Reyes of The Ryan Law Firm, APLC, counsel for Plaintiffs, filed the instant motion to be relieved as counsel. The motion is 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

Kelly Ryan and Jillian Reyes of The Ryan Law Firm, APLC (Counsel) seek to be relieved as counsel for Plaintiffs. Counsel contends significant irreconcilable differences have arisen between Counsel and Plaintiffs and that there has been a breakdown in the attorney-client relationship. (Reyes Decl., ¶ 2.) Counsel further indicates that Plaintiffs have stated they do not want Counsel to continue to represent them in this matter, but that they have refused to execute substitution of counsel forms. (Id.) The Court finds this to be 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 provided the appropriate Judicial Council forms, namely forms MC-051, MC-052, and MC-053, and has properly completed them. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1362, subds. (a), (c), (e).) Each of these documents also contains a proof of service attached thereto indicating that Counsel has served these documents on Plaintiffs at their current address. 

CONCLUSION

The Motion to be Relieved as Plaintiffs’ Counsel is GRANTED. 

Counsel is ordered to give notice of this ruling and file proof of service of same within five calendar days of this order. The Court will sign the Proposed Order (Form MC-053). The Court further orders Counsel to serve the signed Order (Form MC-053) upon Plaintiff and file proof of service of same within five calendar days thereof.