Judge: Malcolm Mackey, Case: 21STCV28887, Date: 2023-01-24 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 21STCV28887    Hearing Date: January 24, 2023    Dept: 55

HILL v. VAULT LOUNGE, LLC                                                  21STCV28887

Hearing Date:  1/24/23,  Dept. 55

#7:   MOTION TO BE RELIEVED AS COUNSEL OF RECORD.

Notice:  Okay

No Opposition

MP:  Prindle, Goetz, Barnes, & Reinholtz LLP, counsel of record for Defendant VAULT LOUNGE, LLC.

RP:  

Summary

On 8/5/21, Plaintiff filed a Complaint for Violation Of The Unruh Civil Rights Act, alleging that defendants failed to comply with California disability access standards applying at the time of each new construction and/or alteration, or failed to maintain accessible features in operable working condition, and, when Plaintiff visited the Property, he experienced multiple access barriers, including those related to parking, paths of travel, signage, and entryway.

MP Positions

Counsel moves to be relieved as attorney of record, based upon a form declaration evidencing:

·         There has been a breakdown in the attorney-client relationship.

·         The client renders it unreasonably difficult to carry out representation effectively.

Tentative Ruling

The motion is granted.

Procedurally, the form notice, declaration, proposed order, and proof of service are sufficiently in compliance.  See  CRC Rule 3.1362.

Additionally, moving counsel’s declaration shows cognizable grounds for withdrawal:

• Breakdown in the attorney-client relationship (or personality clash).  Estate of Falco v. Decker (1987) 188 Cal.App.3d 1004, 1014.
• Client by conduct renders it unreasonably difficult for the member to carry out the employment effectively (e.g., noncooperation or noncommunication).  Rules Prof. Conduct, Rule 1.16(b)(4).  Cf.  Estate of Falco (1987) 188 Cal. App. 3d 1004, 1020 (“We find no abuse of discretion in the trial court's implicit finding rejecting the contention that respondents' lack of cooperation justified appellants' withdrawal.”).

Further, no opposing papers have been filed in order to evidence any prejudice to the client.  See  Rules Prof. Conduct, Rule 1.16(d). 

“The determination whether to grant or deny an attorney 's motion to  withdraw as counsel of record lies within the sound discretion  of the trial court, having in mind whether such withdrawal might work an injustice in the handling of the case.”  Lempert v. Sup. Ct. (2003) 112 Cal. App. 4th 1161, 1173.  See also  Jones v. Green (1946) 74 Cal. App. 2d 223, 230.