Judge: Nathan Vu, Case: 2020-01176078, Date: 2023-01-09 Tentative Ruling
Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel
The motion to be relieved as counsel for Plaintiffs Sentinel Restaurant and Hospitality Group, LLC and Sentinel Restaurant Group-Hendrix, LLC is DENIED without prejudice.
Callahan & Blaine, APLC, move to relieved as counsel for Plaintiffs Sentinel Restaurant and Hospitality Group, LLC and Sentinel Restaurant Group-Hendrix, LLC.
“The attorney in an action or special proceeding may be changed at any time before or after judgment or final determination . . . [u]pon the order of the court, upon the application of either client or attorney, after notice from one to the other.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 284.)
The notice of motion and motion to be relieved as counsel under Civil Procedure Code section 284 shall be directed to the client and shall be made on the Judicial Council’s Notice of Motion and Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel-Civil form (Form MC-051). (Cal. R. Ct. 3.1362, subd. (a).) No memorandum is required for the motion, (see Cal. R. Ct. 3.1362, subd. (b)), but the motion shall be accompanied by a declaration stating in general terms, without compromising the confidentiality of the attorney-client relationship, why counsel is making a motion instead of filing a consent, (Cal. R. Ct. 3.1362, subd. (c)).
If the motion is served by mail, it shall be accompanied by a declaration stating facts showing either that (1) the service address is the current residence or business address of the client or (2) the service address is the last known residence or business address of the client and the attorney has been unable to locate a more current address after making reasonable efforts to do so within 30 days prior to filing the motion. (Cal. R. Ct. 3.1362, subd. (d).)
The motion may be brought on various grounds, some of which include the client’s failure to pay attorney fees, (People v. Prince (1968) 268 Cal.App.2d 398, 406); the client’s insistence on an action that is not justified under existing law or by good faith argument, (Estate of Falco v. Decker (1987) 188 Cal.App.3d 1004, 1015); and a conflict of interest between counsel and the client, (Aceves v. Superior Court (1996) 51 Cal.App.4th 584, 592).
The court finds that counsel for Plaintiffs have complied with the requirements of the California Rules of Court, including serving the client at the client’s last known address. Counsel also has declared a justifiable reason to be relieved as counsel — the breakdown of the attorney-client relationship, the failure of the client to communicate with counsel, and a breach of the retainer agreement.
However, on 06/02/2021, the court ordered the instant action stayed pending completion of arbitration between Plaintiffs and Defendants. (See ROA #49.) The court has not received information that the arbitration has been completed. Further, the stay has not been lifted.
Accordingly, the motion to be relieved as counsel must be denied, pending completion of the arbitration and lifting of the stay. Plaintiffs’ counsel may refile the motion once the stay has been lifted.
The court further notes that the Plaintiffs are limited liability companies that cannot represent themselves and must retain counsel to act on their behalf in court. (See Gamet v. Blanchard (2001) 91 Cal.App.4th 1276, 1284 n.5; Rogers v. Sonoma County Municipal Court (1988) 197 Cal.App.3d 1314, 1318.)
While the ban on self-represented artificial legal entities does not prevent the court from granting the motion to withdraw, it does place pressure on Plaintiffs to obtain new counsel or risk forfeiting important rights through non-representation, such as dismissal of the action or having a default entered. (Rogers v. Sonoma County Municipal Court, supra, 197 Cal.App.3d at p. 1318; Ferruzzo v. Superior Court (1980) 104 Cal.App.3d 501, 504.)
It is therefore incumbent upon the court to advise Plaintiffs of the necessity of obtaining representation or to ensure that the representatives are aware of the need. (Rogers v. Sonoma County Municipal Court, supra, 197 Cal.App.3d at p. 1318.)
The court therefore will order that counsel for Plaintiffs give notice of this ruling.