Judge: Mel Red Recana, Case: 23STCV26655, Date: 2024-03-28 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 23STCV26655    Hearing Date: March 28, 2024    Dept: 45

Superior Court of California 

County of Los Angeles 

Hearing Date:             March 28, 2024

Moving Party:             (1) Attorney Maria G. Enriquez

                                    (2) Attorney Daniel I. Schlessinger

Responding Parties:    None

(1)   Application for Pro Hac Vice of Maria G. Enriquez to Appear as Counsel for Plaintiff.

(2)   Application for Pro Hac Vice of Daniel I. Schlessinger to Appear as Counsel for Plaintiff.

The court considered the verified applications and accompanying declarations.  No opposition was received.

The court GRANTS Maria G. Enriquez’s application to appear as counsel pro hac vice.

The court GRANTS Daniel I. Schlessinger’s application to appear as counsel pro hac vice.

Discussion

Maria G. Enriquez and Daniel I. Schlessinger each apply for pro hac vice admission to appear as counsel for plaintiff Mickey Bearman Company, along with counsel Mary Craig Calkins, for the purpose of this action. 

CRC, 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 fee, provided that the attorney (a) is not a California resident, (b) does not work in California, and (c) does not perform regular or substantial business, professional or other activities in California.

An application for pro hac vice admission must set forth: (1) the applicant attorney’s residence and office addresses; (2) the courts to which the applicant attorney has been admitted and dates of admission; (3) a representation that the attorney applicant is a member in good standing in the courts of admission and is not currently suspended or disbarred in any court; (4) the title of each court and action in which the applicant attorney has appeared pro hac vice in this State in the prior two years; and (5) the name, address and phone number of the active California State Bar member with whom the applicant is associated.  (CRC, Rule 9.40(d).)

Under CRC, Rule 9.40(b), “[a]bsent special circumstances, repeated appearances by any person under this rule is a cause for denial of an application.”

As to Maria G. Enriquez’s pro hac vice application, Ms. Enriquez attests that she is a member of good standing in the State Bar of Illinois and all the courts she has been admitted (with dates of admission), is an Illinois resident and not a resident of California, is not regularly employed in California, and is not regularly engaged in substantial business, professional or other activities in California.  (Declaration of Maria G. Enriquez, ¶¶ 1-3.)  Ms. Enriquez submits the name, address and phone number of the active California State Bar member with whom the applicant is associated.  (Id. at ¶ 6.)  She also attests that, in the preceding two years, she has not applied to appear pro hac vice in any other California Superior Court actions.  (Id. at ¶ 5.)  Further, Ms. Enriquez attests that she is not currently suspended or disbarred in any court.  (Id. at ¶ 4.)  Both Ms. Enriquez and Mary Craig Calkins, counsel for Plaintiff, declare that the necessary fee for the application has been paid.  (Enriquez Decl., ¶ 8; Ex. “A”; Declaration of Mary Craig Calkins, ¶ 3.)  Copies of the application have been served on all interested parties and on the State Bar of California.  (Enriquez Decl., ¶ 7; Calkins Decl., ¶ 3; Ex. “A.”)  

Based on the foregoing, the court finds that Ms. Enriquez establishes that she satisfied the requirements to appear as counsel pro hac vice pursuant to CRC, Rule 9.40.  The court therefore GRANTS Maria G. Enriquez’s application to appear as counsel pro hac vice.

As to Daniel I. Schlessinger’s pro hac vice application, Mr. Schlessinger attests that he is a member of good standing in the State Bar of Illinois and all the courts she has been admitted (with dates of admission), is an Illinois resident and not a resident of California, is not regularly employed in California, and is not regularly engaged in substantial business, professional or other activities in California.  (Declaration of Daniel I. Schlessinger, ¶¶ 1-3.)  Mr. Schlessinger submits the name, address and phone number of the active California State Bar member with whom the applicant is associated.  (Id. at ¶ 6.)  He also attests that, in the preceding two years, he has not applied to appear pro hac vice in any other California Superior Court actions.  (Id. at ¶ 5.)  Further, Mr. Schlessinger attests that he is not suspended or disbarred in any court.  (Id. at ¶ 4.)  Mr. Schlessinger declares that the necessary fee for the application has been paid.  (Id. at ¶ 8; Ex. “A.”)  Copies of the application have been served on all interested parties and on the State Bar of California.  (Id. at ¶ 7.) 

Based on the foregoing, the court finds that Mr. Schlessinger establishes that he satisfied the requirements to appear as counsel pro hac vice pursuant to CRC, Rule 9.40.  The court therefore GRANTS Daniel I. Schlessinger’s application to appear as counsel pro hac vice.

It is so ordered.

Dated: March 28, 2024

_______________________

ROLF M. TREU

    Judge of the Superior Court