Judge: Michael E. Whitaker, Case: 22STCV00913, Date: 2023-02-08 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 22STCV00913    Hearing Date: February 8, 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

MOTIONS

            Attorney Ronald I. Goldszer of the Law Offices of Silverman and Goldszer (Counsel) moves to be relieved as counsel for Plaintiffs Dawn Davis and Brittany Chatmon (collectively, Plaintiffs).  The motions are unopposed.

ANALYSIS

The proofs of service filed in connection with the moving papers indicate Counsel served the notices of the motion, motions, declarations in support, and orders granting said motions on Plaintiffs by electronic transmission on December 12, 2022.  Where notice is served on the client by electronic service, “it must be accompanied by a declaration stating that the electronic service address is the client’s current electronic service address.”  (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1362, subd. (d)(2).)  Further, Section 3(b)(1) of the MC-052 forms indicates Counsel served the moving papers by mail at Plaintiffs’ last known addresses which contradicts what is stated in the attached proofs of service.

The Court therefore denies the motions as procedurally defective.  Counsel is ordered to provide notice of the Court’s rulings and file a proof of service of such.