Judge: Peter A. Hernandez, Case: 21PSCV00334, Date: 2022-11-22 Tentative Ruling

The Court may change tentative rulings at any time. Therefore, attorneys are advised to check this website to determine if any changes or updates have been made to the tentative ruling.

Counsel may submit on the tentative rulings by calling the clerk in Dept. O at 909-802-1126 before 8:30 the morning of the hearing. Submission on the tentative does not bind the court to adopt the tentative ruling at the hearing should the opposing party appear and convince the court of further modification during oral argument.

The Tentative Ruling is not an invitation, nor an opportunity, to file any further documents relative to the hearing in question. No such filing will be considered by the Court in the absence of permission first obtained following ex-parte application therefore.




Case Number: 21PSCV00334    Hearing Date: November 22, 2022    Dept: O

Counsel for Defendant/Cross-Complainant Yuhong Wang, individually, and as trustee of

the Yuhong Wang Family Trust dated June 14, 2019’s (i.e., Law Offices of Edward C. Ip &

Associates, APC) Motion to be Relieved as Counsel is GRANTED, effective upon the filing

of the proof of service showing service of the signed order upon the Client at the Client’s

last known address. An Order to Show Cause Re: Representation of Trustee is set for

November 30, 2022 at 10:00 a.m.

Background   

Plaintiff Jacky Bao-Jia Chai (“Chai”) alleges as follows:

On December 24, 2014, Chai’s father, Kin Yu Kingson Lai (“Lai”) deeded to Chai a ½ interest in the property located at 18213 Villa Clara Street, Rowland Heights, CA 91748 (“subject property”) as joint tenants. On February 26, 2019, Lai deeded his remaining ½ interest in the subject property to Kin Yu Kingson Lai, trustee of the Kin Yu Kingson Lai Family Trust dated March 13, 2005 (“Lai Trust”). Lai died on May 11, 2019. On July 30, 2019, Yuhong Wang as trustee of the Lai Trust deeded the Lai trust’s one-half ownership interest in the subject property to herself individually before subsequently deeding it to herself as trustee of the Yuhong Wang Family Trust dated June 14, 2019 (“Wang Trust”). Chai seeks a partition.

On April 28, 2021, Chai filed a complaint, asserting causes of action against Wang, individually

and as trustee of the Wang Trust, JPMorgan Chase Bank N.A. dba Chase (“Bank”), All Persons

Known of Unknown Having or Claiming an Interest in the Property and Does 1-20 for:

1.                  Partition of Real Property

2.                  Declaratory Relief

3.                  Accounting

On June 15, 2021, Bank filed a “Stipulation for Non-Monetary Judgment.”

On August 30, 2021, Wang individually and as trustee of the Wang Trust filed a cross-complaint,

asserting causes of action against Chai, Bank and Roes-120 for:

1.               Partition of Real Property

2.               Accounting

3.               Declaratory Relief

On November 12, 2021, Bank filed a “Stipulation for Non-Monetary Judgment.”

A Final Status Conference is set for March 3, 2023. Trial is set for March 17, 2023.

Discussion

The Law Offices of Edward C. Ip & Associates, APC) (“Firm”) seeks to be relieved as counsel

of record for Defendant/Cross-Complainant Yuhong Wang, individually, and as trustee of

the Yuhong Wang Family Trust dated June 14, 2019 (“Client”).

The court has discretion to allow an attorney to withdraw, and such a motion should be granted provided that there is no prejudice to the client and it does not disrupt the orderly process of

justice. (See Ramirez v. Sturdevant (1994) 21 Cal.App.4th 904, 915; People v. Prince (1968) 268 Cal.App.2d 398.)

California Rule of Court (“CRC”) Rule 3.1362 requires (1) a notice of motion and motion directed to the client (made on the Notice of Motion and Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel—Civil form (MC-051)); (2) a declaration stating in general terms and without compromising the confidentiality of the attorney-client relationship why a motion under Code of Civil Procedure § 284(2) is brought instead of filing a consent under section 284(1) (made on the Declaration in Support of Attorney's Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel—Civil form (MC-052)); (3) service of the notice of motion and motion, the declaration, and the proposed order on the client and on all other parties who have appeared in the case; and (4) a proposed order relieving counsel (prepared on the Order Granting Attorney's Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel—Civil form (MC-053)). The court may delay the effective date of the order relieving counsel until proof of service of a copy of the signed order on the client has been filed with the court.

Attorney Edward C. Ip (“Ip”) represents that “[t]he attorney-client relationship is irreparably broken down and any further representation by counsel will not be helpful to Client, as they have been unresponsive to phone calls and communications.”

Ip states that he has served the Client by mail at the Client’s last known address with copies of the motion papers served with this declaration and that he has confirmed, within the past 30 days, that the address is current, via telephone.

The court further notes that attached to the motion is a copy of a correspondence dated September 30, 2022 addressed to Wang with the subject line “Termination of Legal Services.” This letter appears to have been sent via email and certified mail with return receipt requested.

The court determines that the requirements of Rules of Court Rule 3.1362 enumerated above

have been sufficiently met.

 

Accordingly, the motion is granted, effective upon the filing of the proof of service reflecting

service of the signed order upon the Client at the Client’s last known address.

 

An Order to Show Cause Re: Representation of Trustee is set for November 30, 2022 at 10:00 a.m.