Judge: Martha K. Gooding, Case: 2014-00745712, Date: 2022-12-19 Tentative Ruling

1) Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel of Record         

2) Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel of Record         

3) Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel of Record

4) Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel of Record

5) Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel of Record

6) Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel of Record

7) Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel of Record

The Motions by attorney Robert Bare to be relieved as counsel for Defendants Rima Radwan, Mazen Radwan, Dean Robbins, Tribune Management, Inc., The Student Loan Group, D.O.R.M. Group, Inc. and Heritage Asset Management, Inc. are DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.

First, the motions were not accompanied by the required Declaration on Form MC-052. (CRC 3.1362(c).)

Second, due to the failure to provide Declarations on Form MC-052, Counsel has not confirmed his clients’ addresses, as required. (CRC 3.1362(d)(1).)

Third, the Court notes that adequate service has not been shown as to the corporate defendants, Tribune Management, Inc., The Student Loan Group, D.O.R.M. Group, Inc. and Heritage Asset Management, Inc.  With respect to these entities, Counsel filed a Proof of Service on October 14, 2022, which indicates mail service that same day on Andrew Green (“Green”) of McNamara Smith, LLP.  (ROA No. 478.)  It appears service on Green may have been intended to effect service on the corporate Defendants; however, the Proof of Service does not identify Green or his relation to these entities.  Additionally, there is no clear representation in the Proof of Service that this mailing effected service on the corporate Defendants.

Finally, there has been no showing that Mazen Radwan, Dean Robbins, Tribune Management, Inc., The Student Loan Group, D.O.R.M. Group, Inc. or Heritage Asset Management, Inc. were provided notice of the advanced hearing date. (ROA No. 489.)

Based on all of the above, the motions are DENIED without prejudice to subsequent, properly supported, motions.

If all parties wish to submit on the tentative ruling, they shall promptly notify the Court’s clerk by telephone.

If any party wishes oral argument on the tentative, the argument is continued to Thursday, January 5, 2023 at 1:30 p.m. due to a conflict on the Court’s calendar.