Judge: Mark A. Young, Case: 24SMCV02124, Date: 2024-07-17 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 24SMCV02124    Hearing Date: July 17, 2024    Dept: M

CASE NAME:           Berg v. Wright Medical Technology Inc., et al.

CASE NO.:                24SMCV02124

MOTION:                  Application to Appear Pro Hac Vice

HEARING DATE:   7/17/2024

LEGAL STANDARD

California Rules of Court, rule 9.40 provides that an attorney in good standing in another jurisdiction may apply to appear pro hac vice in this State by way of written application upon due notice to all interested parties, as well as service on the State Bar in San Francisco with payment of a $50.00 fee, so long as that attorney is not a resident of California, does not work in California and does not perform regular or substantial business, professional or other activities in the State.

The written application must provide the following information:

(1)  The applicant's residence and office address;

(2)  The courts to which the applicant has been admitted to practice and the dates of admission;

(3)  That the applicant is a licensee in good standing in those courts;

(4)  That the applicant is not currently suspended or disbarred in any court;

(5)  The title of each court and cause in which the applicant has filed an application to appear as counsel pro hac vice in this state in the preceding two years, the date of each application, and whether or not it was granted; and

(6)  The name, address, and telephone number of the active licensee of the State Bar of California who is attorney of record.

(CRC Rule 9.40(d).)

ANALYSIS

            Counsel George E. McLaughlin applies for admission pro hac vice in order to represent Plaintiff James Berg. Counsel provides all the required information. (CRC Rule 9.40.) The Court will allow counsel’s admission pro hac vice. That said, the Court notes that admission pro hac vice is not a right. Counsel states that he has represented clients in four other California cases in the preceding two years. In light of this frequency of representation, further pro hac vice applications may be appropriately denied at the discretion of the court.

Accordingly, the motion is GRANTED.