Judge: Michael D. Washington, Case: 37-2023-00006579-CU-CR-NC, Date: 2024-05-10 Tentative Ruling

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA,

DEPT.:

EVENT DATE:

EVENT TIME:

SOUTH BUILDING TENTATIVE RULINGS - May 09, 2024

05/10/2024  01:30:00 PM  N-31 COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO

JUDICIAL OFFICER:Michael D Washington

CASE NO.:

CASE CATEGORY:

EVENT TYPE:

CASE TITLE: CASE TYPE:

Civil - Unlimited  Civil Rights Motion Hearing (Civil) 37-2023-00006579-CU-CR-NC CITY OF SAN MARCOS VS GREENGO INDUSTRIES INC [IMAGED] CAUSAL DOCUMENT/DATE FILED: Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel of Record, 04/19/2024

The Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel brought by attorneys Michael Columbo (Attorney Columbo) and Jeremiah Graham (Attorney Graham) (collectively, the Dhillon Firm) is continued to Friday, May 31, 2024 at 10:15 a.m. in Department N-31.

The declaration in support of the motion indicates that the Dhillon Firm has not been able to confirm the client's mailing address. When counsel engages a client who then becomes unreachable, the Court is left with an open case, but without a clear point-of-contact. It is for this reason that the mandatory Judicial Council Forms for being relieved as counsel require an attorney to confirm the address of the client when seeking to be relieved. It is counsel that has the power to screen cases and clients prior to taking them and prior to filing an action in court, and, as such, when a client disappears or becomes unreachable, it is counsel who has the burden to attempt to locate that client and obtain a reasonable means of serving them. Such efforts may include reaching out to client contacts or known affiliates or agents, searches of the white pages or yellow pages, searches of social media, 'skip trace' efforts by attorney services, or even in certain cases more rigorous efforts by a private investigator. There is no 'one size fits all' requirement in this regard. However, the Court does not allow counsel who voluntarily take a case to saddle it with the burden of tracking down clients unless it is apparent that reasonably practicable means of locating the client have failed. In the instant motion, counsel's efforts to confirm an address that the Court can use as a formal address of record for the client are insufficient. As such, the Court continues the motion to provide time for counsel to make additional efforts and supplement their moving papers. The deadline for filing and serving said supplemental information is Friday, May 24, 2024.

In the alternative, if counsel is able to appear at the hearing and, under oath, confirm a mailing address of the client, the Court will accept such in lieu of additional search efforts. It appears to the Court that there are valid reasons for the Dhillon Firm to be relieved, and, as such, once greater clarity of the confirmation of the client's address is provided, the Court is otherwise prepared to grant the motion.

Unless the ruling(s) above indicate that an appearance is necessary, parties who wish to submit, who are satisfied with the above tentative ruling(s), and/or who do not otherwise wish to argue the motion(s) are encouraged to give notice to the Court and each other of their intention not to appear.

Calendar No.: Event ID:  TENTATIVE RULINGS

3119752