Judge: Peter A. Hernandez, Case: 24STCV05412, Date: 2024-09-18 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 24STCV05412    Hearing Date: September 18, 2024    Dept: 34

Maiden v. Diamond Motor Cars, et al. (23STCV24849)

Counsel for Defendant Diamond Motor Cars’ (i.e., Cedar Adams PC) Motion to be

Relieved as Counsel is GRANTED, effective upon the filing of a proof of service showing

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

Background

Plaintiff Shamil Maiden (“Plaintiff”) alleges the following:

On March 12, 2022, Plaintiff purchased the 2013 Mercedes-Benz C-Class with VIN: WDDGF4HB4DA861746 (the "Vehicle"). Plaintiff made a total down payment of $4,000 and financed the remaining balance. The total sale price for the Vehicle on the Retail Installment Sales Contract was $21,963.52. Before the purchase, Defendant Diamond Motor Cars’ (“Defendant”) salesperson told Plaintiff that the Vehicle was in condition, that it had been driven often, that it had even been driven home by some of Dealer's employees, and that the previous owner maintained it regularly. Plaintiff bought the Vehicle based on Dealer's representations. By May 2022, the Vehicle had an engine misfire. Plaintiff took the Vehicle back to Defendant for a diagnosis, and Defendant charged Plaintiff $380.00 to replace an ignition coil in the Vehicle. Plaintiff took the Vehicle back again to Defendant for another issue, and Defendant refused to help Plaintiff. Plaintiff then towed the Vehicle to Placentia Super Service, where she learned the Vehicle had a cracked engine. Based on the condition of the Vehicle, the representations about the Vehicle by were not accurate.

On September 21, 2022, Plaintiff filed a complaint, asserting causes of action against Defendant and Does 2-75 for:

1.               Civil Code § 1750 et seq.;

2.               Fraud and Deceit;

3.               Negligent Misrepresentation; and

4.               Business and Professions Code § 17200 et seq.

A Final Status Conference is scheduled for September 18, 2024, and a Jury Trial is scheduled for September 30, 2024.

Discussion[1]    

Cedar Adams LP (“Firm”) seeks to be relieved as counsel of record for Defendant (“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 Rules 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 Adam K. Obeid (“Obeid”) represents that he “has lost meaningful contact with Diamond Motor Cars, Inc., such that counsel has been unable to properly prepare this case for trial and secure client's witnesses, including the expert witness retained by client. Further, there are outstanding billables unpaid from Diamond Motor Cars. The lack of meaningful communication and the lack of payment has strained the attorney - client relationship to an unmanageable point. Moreover, the last communication from client was notice that the business would be shutting down and closing. Under the totality of the circumstances, counsel can no longer properly represent Diamond Motor Cars.”

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 a proof of service showing

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