Judge: Michael P. Linfield, Case: 22STCV16119, Date: 2023-05-09 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 22STCV16119    Hearing Date: May 9, 2023    Dept: 34

SUBJECT:         Motion to be Relieved as Counsel

 

Moving Party:  Plaintiff’s Counsel George Knopfler, Kenneth A. Kotarski, Hamrick & Evans, LLP

Resp. Party:    None

 

 

The Motion to be Relieved as Counsel is GRANTED.

 

BACKGROUND:

 

On May 13, 2022, Plaintiffs Forward Westwood, Inc., Forward Calabasas, Inc., Joseph Sacavitch, Edward Krifcher, and Paul Morris filed their Complaint against Defendant Meny A. Atias regarding various causes of action arising from the Parties’ business relationship.

 

On July 12, 2022, Defendant/Cross-Complainant Meny A. Atias filed: (1) Answer to the Complaint; and (2) Cross-Complaint against Plaintiffs/Cross-Defendants Forward Westwood, Inc., Forward Calabasas, Inc., Paul Morris, Edward Krifcher, and Joseph Sacavitch.

 

On August 15, 2022, Plaintiffs/Cross-Defendants filed their Answer to the Cross-Complaint.

 

On March 10, 2023, Plaintiffs/Cross-Defendants’ Counsel (George Knopfler, Kenneth A. Kotarski, and Hamrick & Evans, LLP) filed: (1) MC-051, Motion to be Relieved as Counsel; (2) MC-052, Declaration; and (3) MC-053, Proposed Order.

 

On May 2, 2023, Plaintiffs/Cross-Defendants’ Counsel filed their Notice of No Opposition.

 

ANALYSIS:

 

I.           Legal Standard

 

An attorney moving to be relieved as counsel under California Code of Civil Procedure section 284(2) must meet the requirements set out in California Rules of Court, rule 3.1362.

 

To comply with rule 3.1362, the moving party must submit the following forms: (1) Notice of Motion and Motion to be Relieved as Counsel; (2) Declaration in Support of Attorney's Motion to be Relieved as Counsel; and (3) Order Granting Attorney's Motion to be Relieved as Counsel. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1362(a), (c), (e).)

 

The moving party must serve the aforementioned forms on the client and all other parties who have appeared in the case. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1362(d).) Further, when the client is served by mail, the attorney's declaration must show that the client's address was confirmed within the last 30 days and how it was confirmed. (Id.) 

 

Absent a showing of resulting prejudice, an attorney’s request for withdrawal should be granted.  (People v. Prince (1968) 268 Cal.App.2d 398, 406.)

 

II.        Discussion

 

Counsels’ Motion to be Relieved as Counsel complies with the requirements of California Rules of Court, rule 3.1362.

 

The declaration states: (1) that Plaintiffs/Cross-Defendants have breached their Counsels’ materials terms and obligations relating to the representation, despite reasonable warning that Counsel would withdraw if the obligations were not performed; and (2) that Plaintiffs/Cross-Defendants’ other conduct is rendering the representation unreasonably difficult. (Decl., Item 2.)

 

It is possible that Plaintiffs/Cross-Defendants would be prejudiced if their Counsel is allowed to leave the representation. Aside from narrow exceptions such as in small claims court, the California Supreme Court has long held that corporations cannot represent themselves in propria persona. (Merco Constr. Eng’rs, Inc. v. Mun. Ct. (1978) 21 Cal.3d.724, 730.) The risk of prejudice is somewhat less for the individual Plaintiffs/Cross-Defendants.

 

However, the trial court may allow a corporation’s attorney to withdraw from representation, even if that would leave the corporation without representation. (Ferruzzo v. Super. Ct. (1980) 104 Cal.App.3d 501, 504.) “For the uncooperative corporate client who has not been willing to bring in new counsel, granting of the withdrawal motion will put extreme pressure on it to obtain new counsel of record for should it fail to do so it risks forfeiture of its rights through nonrepresentation.” (Id.)¿ 

 

Trial is more than five months after the hearing on this motion. That is sufficient time for all Plaintiffs/Cross-Defendants to obtain new counsel. In addition, the Court notes the lack of opposition to the Motion.

 

 The Court GRANTS the Motion to be Relieved as Counsel.

 

III.     Conclusion

 

The Motion to be Relieved as Counsel is GRANTED.