Judge: Michelle C. Kim, Case: 20STCV45302, Date: 2023-04-14 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 20STCV45302    Hearing Date: April 14, 2023    Dept: 31

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA  

FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - CENTRAL DISTRICT 

      The
hearing on Plaintiff's Motion to be Relieved as Counsel  is continued
to April 28, 2023 to 1:30 pm in this Department.

Plaintiff Isabel Gurdian De Diaz’s (“Plaintiff”) counsel of
record, Carlos A. Gomez (“Counsel”), seeks to be relieved as counsel, stating
there has been a complete breakdown of the attorney-client relationship. The
motion MC-051 is supported by Counsel’s declarations MC-052, proposed order
MC-053, and proof of service.

In his February 7
declaration, Counsel declares he served the client by mail at the client’s last

known address with
copies of the motion papers served with his declaration. (Gomez
Decl. ¶ 3a(2).) Further, Counsel declares that he confirmed
within the past 30 days that the address is current because he:

Mailed certified letter to Plaintiff's address
with return receipt, which was delivered and not returned. Mailed follow up
letter on May 5, 2022 via regular mail which was not returned. Have not found
any new address via Westlaw PeopleMap. Also, called and spoke with her close
friend, whom she left as an alternate contact, on May 9, 2022, and confirmed
Plaintiff's mailing address remains the same, and Plaintiff received our
letters, per her discussions with Plaintiff.

(Gomez Decl. ¶ 3b(1).)

Certified mail with return receipt does not establish proof that
the address is confirmed merely because it was not
returned.  However, in his February 27 declaration, Counsel declares
that he confirmed within the past 30 days that the address is current by
conversation. (Gomez Decl. ¶ 3b(1).)  At the hearing on this matter, the Court wishes
to hear from Counsel in greater detail about how the mailing address was
confirmed by conversation.

 
      The motion is unopposed and granted assuming the Court is
satisfied with confirmation of the client’s address. The ruling is effective
upon filing proof of service of the final order.  The Court notes the next
scheduled matter is a Final Status Conference set for October 9, 2023, and
trial is not scheduled until October 23, 2023.  Therefore, there will be
time for Plaintiff to obtain other counsel or prepare for trial.

                       

               
  Counsel is ordered to give notice.

The Court is not available to hear oral argument on this date.  If the parties do not submit on the tentative and want oral argument, the hearing will have to be continued, and the parties must work with the clerk to find an available date for the continuance.

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE: 

·         Parties are encouraged to meet and confer after reading this tentative ruling to see if they can reach an agreement. 

·         If a party intends to submit on this tentative ruling, the party must send an email to the court at sscdept31@lacourt.org with the Subject line “SUBMIT” followed by the case number.  The body of the email must include the hearing date and time, counsel’s contact information, and the identity of the party submitting. 

·         Unless all parties submit by email to this tentative ruling, the parties should arrange to appear remotely (encouraged) or in person for oral argument. You should assume that others may appear at the hearing to argue. 

·         If the parties neither submit nor appear at hearing, the Court may take the motion off calendar or adopt the tentative ruling as the order of the Court. After the Court has issued a tentative ruling, the Court may prohibit the withdrawal of the subject motion without leave. 

Dated this 14^th day of April 2023