Judge: Michelle C. Kim, Case: 21STCV29611, Date: 2023-03-16 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 21STCV29611    Hearing Date: March 16, 2023    Dept: 31

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - CENTRAL DISTRICT

Plaintiffs Caroline Zemaitis’s and Paulus Zemaitis’s (collectively, “Plaintiffs”) attorney of record, Joshua J. Franklin (“Counsel”), moves to be relieved as counsel for Plaintiffs.  Counsel contends relief is necessary because Plaintiffs are not communicating or cooperating with Counsel making representation impossible in this matter.  Counsel has filed proof of service of the moving papers on Plaintiffs and Defendant. 

Counsel provides it has served the moving papers on Plaintiffs at Plaintiffs’ last known address; however, Counsel does not indicate how Plaintiffs’ address was confirmed as current within the past 30 days.  Counsel’s declaration states only, “Additionally, counsel has served the moving papers via E-Mail to Plaintiffs. At the least hearing, Plaintiffs actually showed up at the hearing.”  (Form MC-052 ¶ 3.)  It is thus unclear whether Counsel served Plaintiffs at an address confirmed as current.  If Counsel has not served Plaintiffs at a confirmed address, the requirement that Counsel serve the moving papers on the Clerk of the Court pursuant to CCP §1011(b) and California Rules Court, rule 3.1362(d) would preclude the granting of the motion.  

Furthermore, to the extent that Counsel asserts that the moving papers were served by email on Plaintiffs, the proof of service attached to the moving papers does not indicate any email address for Plaintiffs at which the motion was served.   Additionally, California Rules of Court, Rule 3.1362(d)(2) states: “If the notice is served on the client by electronic service under Code of Civil Procedure section 1010.6 and rule 2.251, it must be accompanied by a declaration stating that the electronic service address is the client's current electronic service address.”  The Court cannot locate any such declaration with Counsel’s motion.

Based on the foregoing, the motion is denied without prejudice. 

Moving Counsel is ordered to give notice. 

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 16^th day of March 2023