Judge: Michelle C. Kim, Case: 22STCV05866, Date: 2024-04-16 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 22STCV05866    Hearing Date: April 16, 2024    Dept: 31

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA  

FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - CENTRAL DISTRICT 

 

WINDY ALCARAZ, 

Plaintiff(s), 

vs. 

 

BUFFALO WILD WINGS, INC., ET AL., 

 

Defendant(s). 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

      CASE NO: 22STCV05866 

 

[TENTATIVE] ORDER GRANTING APPLICATION TO APPEAR PRO HAC VICE  

 

Dept. 31 

1:30 p.m.  

April 16, 2024 

 

I. BACKGROUND 

Kathleen M. Klein (“Applicant”) seeks admission to appear as counsel pro hac vice to represent defendant Blazin Wings, Inc., erroneously sued as Buffalo Wild Wings, Inc., in this action along with Tyler M. Costanzo of Clausen Miller P.C. (“Counsel”), an active member of the State Bar of California.  

The motion is unopposed. 

 

II. PRO HAC VICE APPLICATION  

  1. Legal Standard 

An out-of-state lawyer, not admitted to practice in California, may be admitted pro hac vice—i.e., to appear and take part in a particular action only. Applications for such admission are generally heard as law and motion matters. (CRC Rule 9.40.) 

To be eligible for admission pro hac vice: (1) the applicant must be admitted to practice before a U.S. court, or the highest court of any state or territory; (2) he or she must not be a California resident, nor regularly engaged in practice or other business here; and (3) a member of the California Bar must be associated as attorney of record in the case. (CRC, rule 9.40(a).) A verified application must be filed stating (1) the applicant's residence and office addresses; (2) the court or courts in which he or she is admitted to practice and the dates of admission; (3) that he or she is currently in good standing in such courts; (4) that he or she has not been suspended or disbarred in any court; (5) the title and case number of any California action in which he or she has applied to appear pro hac vice during the preceding two years, the date of each application, and whether or not it was granted; and (6) the name, address and telephone number of the active member of the State Bar who is attorney of record. (CRC Rule 9.40(d)—filing fee must accompany application.)   

Copies of the application must be served by mail upon all parties who have appeared in the action, and also upon the State Bar at its San Francisco office at least 16 court days before the hearing (notice governed by CCP § 1005).  A fee (currently $50) must be paid to the State Bar.  (CRC Rule 9.40.) 

 

  1. Discussion   

The applicant establishes that she is licensed in the State of Illinois, and that she is in good standing. Applicant has been admitted pro hac vice in the State of California once in the past two years, and provides the title and case number of the California action. Applicant declares she is not a California resident and does not regularly work in California. Licensed California attorney, Tyler M. Costanzo, is associated as counsel in this case. Counsel of record tendered payment to the State Bar. (Costanzo Decl. ¶ 3.) Further, Counsel declares that a copy of the application and moving papers were uploaded to the State Bar of California’s portal for pro hac vice admissions. (Ibid.) The application sufficiently satisfies CRC rule 9.40. 

 

III. CONCLUSION 

Therefore, the application for admission pro hac vice of Kathleen M. Klein is GRANTED. 

 

 Moving party 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 15th day of April 2024 

 

  

 

 

Hon. Michelle C. Kim 

Judge of the Superior Court