Judge: Michael E. Whitaker, Case: 21STCV03346, Date: 2023-04-13 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 21STCV03346    Hearing Date: April 13, 2023    Dept: 32

PLEASE NOTE:   Parties are encouraged to meet and confer concerning this tentative ruling to determine if a resolution may be reached.  If the parties are unable to reach a resolution and a party intends to submit on this tentative ruling, the party must send an email to the Court at sscdept32@lacourt.org indicating that party’s intention to submit.  The email shall include the case number, date and time of the hearing, counsel’s contact information (if applicable), and the identity of the party submitting on this tentative ruling.  If the Court does not receive an email indicating the parties are submitting on this tentative ruling and there are no appearances at the hearing, the Court may place the motion off calendar or adopt the tentative ruling as the order of the Court.  If all parties do not submit on this tentative ruling, they should arrange to appear in-person or remotely (which is highly encouraged).  Further, after the Court has posted/issued a tentative ruling, the Court has the inherent authority to prohibit the withdrawal of the subject motion and adopt the tentative ruling as the order of the Court. 

TENTATIVE RULING

MOTION

Erick B. Novick of Novik Law Group (“Counsel”) moves to be relieved as counsel for Plaintiff Daniel Cedillos (“Plaintiff”).  The motion is unopposed.

ANALYSIS

Counsel has filed forms MC-051 and MC-052 and has lodged with the Court a copy of the proposed order on form MC-053 as required.  (Cal Rules of Court, rule 3.1362.)  The basis for the motion is a breakdown in attorney-client communication.  This is a valid reason for withdrawal.  (See Rules Prof. Conduct, rule 1.16.) 

However, the Court finds that Counsel has not provided proof of service reflecting that the notice of motion and motion, the declaration, and the proposed order have been served on Plaintiff as required. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1362(d); see also Code Civ. Proc., § 1005.)   

Consequently, the Court denies the motion as procedurally defective.  Counsel is ordered to provide notice of this order and file a proof of service of such.