Judge: Melvin D. Sandvig, Case: 19CHCV00267, Date: 2023-03-15 Tentative Ruling

Counsel wishing to submit on a tentative ruling may inform the clerk or courtroom assisant in North Valley Department F47, 9425 Penfield Ave., Chatsworth, CA 91311, at (818) 407-2247.  Please be aware that unless all parties submit, the matter will still be called for hearing and may be argued by any appearing/non-submitting parties. If the matter is submitted on the court's tentative ruling by all parties, counsel for moving party shall give notice of ruling. This may be done by incorporating verbatim the court's tentative ruling. The tentative ruling may be extracted verbatim by copying and specially pasting, as unformatted text, from the Los Angeles Superior Court’s website, http://www.lasuperiorcourt.org. All hearings on law and motion and other calendar matters are generally NOT transcribed by a court reporter unless one is provided by the party(ies).

Case Number: 19CHCV00267    Hearing Date: March 15, 2023    Dept: F47

Dept. F47

Date: 3/15/23                                                          TRIAL DATE: 5/15/23

Case #19CHCV00267

MOTION TO BE RELIEVED AS COUNSEL

Motion filed on 2/21/23.

MOVING ATTORNEY: Garabed Kamarian

CLIENT: Plaintiff Madlen Hagopian

RULING: The motion is placed off calendar.   

This is the third motion filed by attorney Garabed Kamarian seeking an order relieving him as counsel for Plaintiff Madlen Hagopian in this action.  The two previous motions were taken off calendar by the Court due to issues with service of the motion.  (See 12/6/22 Minute Order; 1/31/23 Minute Order).  There is still no evidence that the motion was properly served.      

The declaration in support of the motion indicates that the client was personally served with the motion.  (See Declaration, No.3.a.(1)).  However, the proof of service for the motion indicates that it was served on the client on 3/8/23 by certified mail, return receipt requested and on opposing counsel by electronic service.  (See Proof of Service filed 3/8/23).  Even if the attorney declaration had indicated that service was made on the client by mail, return receipt requested, the proof of service is deficient.  The service on 3/8/23 for the 3/15/23 hearing date is untimely regardless of the type of service.  See CCP 1005(b), 1010.6(a)(3)(B) (service of a motion requires 16 court days’ notice + 5 calendar days for service by mail and + 2 court days for electronic service).  Additionally, no signed return receipt has been filed. 

Again, no response to the motion has been filed to cure the foregoing notice defects.