Judge: Maurice A. Leiter, Case: 20STCV19934, Date: 2023-03-28 Tentative Ruling


Case Number: 20STCV19934    Hearing Date: March 28, 2023    Dept: 54

Superior Court of California

County of Los Angeles

 

Khaled J. Al-Sabah,

 

 

 

Plaintiff,

 

Case No.:

 

 

20STCV19934

 

vs.

 

 

Tentative Ruling

 

 

Michael Edward Bass and Usman Shaikh, 

 

 

 

Defendants.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Hearing Date: March 28, 2023

Department 54, Judge Maurice A. Leiter

Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel

Moving Party: Jessica Sauber, Counsel of Record for Defendant Michael Edward Bass

Responding Party: Defendant Michael Edward Bass

 

T/R:     THE MOTION IS GRANTED. COUNSEL TO FILE PROOF OF SERVICE OF ORDER ON PLAINTIFF WITHIN 5 DAYS OF NOTICE OF RULING. COUNSEL WILL BE RELIEVED UPON FILING OF PROOF OF SERVICE OF ORDER.

 

If the parties wish to submit on the tentative, please email the courtroom at¿SMCdept54@lacourt.org¿with notice to opposing counsel (or self-represented party) before 8:00 am on the day of the hearing.

COUNSEL TO NOTICE.

 

The Court considers the moving papers, opposition, and reply.

 

The Court may issue an order allowing an attorney to withdraw from representation, after notice to the client.  (CCP § 284.)  The attorney may withdraw from representation as long as the withdrawal would not result in undue prejudice to the client’s interest—i.e., counsel cannot withdraw at a critical point in the litigation.  (Ramirez v. Sturdevant (1994) 21 Cal. App. 4th 904, 915; see California Rule of Professional Conduct 3-700.)

 

Jessica Sauber, counsel of record for Defendant Michael Edward Bass seeks to withdraw from representation of Defendant. Counsel states that the attorney-client relationship has broken down. In opposition, Defendant asserts counsel’s representation has been satisfactory to him and demands that counsel return fees Defendant paid to counsel. Defendant also asserts the motion was not properly served.

 

Trial is set for June 26, 2023; Defendant has represented himself through much of this case. (The case was filed in May 2020; counsel substituted in in November 2022.) Defendant will not be prejudiced by counsel’s withdrawal. Counsel has complied with CRC 3.1362. Counsel properly served Defendant by mailing the papers to his last known address. The Court cannot address the issue of fees in this motion.

 

There is good cause for counsel’s withdrawal. The motion is GRANTED.