Judge: Peter A. Hernandez, Case: BC697068, Date: 2022-09-28 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: BC697068    Hearing Date: September 28, 2022    Dept: O

1.         Plaintiff Kyle Olsen’s Application of Alexandra Poulson to Appear as Counsel Pro Hac Vice is GRANTED.

Background   

Plaintiff Kyle Olsen (“Plaintiff”) alleges as follows: On or about May 9, 2017, Plaintiff sustained injuries after his vehicle collided with an X-Lite guardrail end terminal that bordered I-10.

On March 8, 2018, Plaintiff filed a complaint, asserting causes of action against Valmont Industries, Inc. (“VII”), Valmont Highway, Armorflex International Limited (“Armorflex”), Lindsay Corporation (“Lindsay Corp.”), Lindsay Transportation Solution Sales & Service LLC (“Lindsay TSSS”), Ferreira Construction Co., Inc. (“Ferreira”), State of California (“CalTrans”) and Does 1-50 for:

1.                  Negligence and Negligence Per Se

2.                  Strict Liability

3.                  Negligence

4.                  Negligence

On May 18, 2018, Ferreira filed a cross-complaint, asserting causes of action against Statewide Traffic Safety and Signs Inc. and Roes 1-50 for:

1.                  Contribution

2.                  Declaratory Relief

3.                  Equitable Indemnity

4.                  Implied Indemnity

On June 20, 2018, this case was transferred from Department 3 of the Personal Injury Court to this instant department.

On August 27, 2018, CalTrans filed a cross-complaint, asserting causes of action against VII, Valmont Highway, Armorflex, Lindsay Corp., Lindsay TSSS, Ferreira, Powell Constructors Inc (“Powell”) and Roes 1-50 for:

1.                  Equitable Indemnity

2.                  Express Indemnity

On November 19, 2018, Powell filed a cross-complaint, asserting causes of action against Ferreira and Moes 1-10 for:

1.                  Breach of Contract

2.                  Express Indemnity

3.                  Equitable Indemnity

4.                  Equitable Apportionment

5.                  Implied Contractual Indemnity

6.                  Declaratory Relief

The Final Status Conference is set for October 25, 2022. Trial is set for November 8, 2022.

1.         Application for Admission Pro Hac Vice

Legal Standard

“A person who is not a licensee of the State Bar of California but who is an attorney in good standing of and eligible to practice before the bar of any United States court or the highest court in any state, territory, or insular possession of the United States, and who has been retained to appear in a particular cause pending in a court of this state, may in the discretion of such court be permitted upon written application to appear as counsel pro hac vice, provided that an active licensee of the State Bar of California is associated as attorney of record. No person is eligible to appear as counsel pro hac vice under this rule if the person is: (1) A resident of the State of California; (2) Regularly employed in the State of California; or (3) Regularly engaged in substantial business, professional, or other activities in the State of California.” (Cal. Rules of Court (“CRC”), rule 9.40, subd. (a).)“

"A person desiring to appear as counsel pro hac vice in a superior court must file with the court a verified application together with proof of service by mail in accordance with Code of Civil Procedure section 1013a of a copy of the application and of the notice of hearing of the application on all parties who have appeared in the cause and on the State Bar of California at its San Francisco office. The notice of hearing must be given at the time prescribed in Code of Civil Procedure section 1005 unless the court has prescribed a shorter period.” (CRC rule 9.40, subd. (c)(1).)

“The application must state: (1) The applicant's residence and office address; (2) The courts to which the applicant has been admitted to practice and the dates of admission; (3) That the applicant is a licensee in good standing in those courts; (4) That the applicant is not currently suspended or disbarred in any court; (5) The title of each court and cause in which the applicant has filed an application to appear as counsel pro hac vice in this state in 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 licensee of the State Bar of California who is attorney of record.” (CRC rule 9.40, subd. (d).)

“An applicant for permission to appear as counsel pro hac vice under this rule must pay a reasonable fee not exceeding $50 to the State Bar of California with the copy of the application and the notice of hearing that is served on the State Bar. . .” (CRC rule 9.40, subd. (e).)

Discussion

Plaintiff moves, pursuant to California Rules of Court Rule 9.40, for an order allowing the pro hac vice admission of Alexandra Poulson. The application complies with the requirements of California Rules of Court Rule 9.40; accordingly, the application is granted.