Yon Park v. Hye Min Choi

MOTION TO BE RELIEVED AS COUNSEL

 

MOVING PARTY: Law Offices of S. Calvin Myung (Counsel for Plaintiff Yon Park)

RESPONDING PARTY(S): None

STATEMENT OF MATERIAL FACTS AND/OR PROCEEDINGS:

Plaintiff Yon Park owns commercial real property Plaintiff leased to Defendant Hye Min Choi.  Plaintiff alleges Defendant left substantial damage when Defendant vacated the promises.  Plaintiff asserts causes of action for (1) breach of contract and (2) breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing.  Defendant then filed a Cross-Complaint for (1) breach of written lease agreement, (2) bad faith retention of security deposit (Civ. Code Section 1950.7), and (3) Breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing.

Law Offices of S. Calvin Myung, counsel for Plaintiff, moves to be relieved as counsel.  The motion is unopposed.

TENTATIVE RULING:

Counsel’s motion to be relieved as counsel is GRANTED.  

An OSC re: Striking of the Complaint and/or Answer to the Cross-Complaint is set for August 29, 2023 at 8:30 a.m.  Since the Plaintiff is now deceased, there must be a person to prosecute this case, if so desired, as the successor-in-interest.  That person must be represented by a lawyer licensed to practice law in California.  The same is true for defending the Cross-Complaint, by the decedent’s authorized representative.  

If the duly-authorized person (with or without counsel – or new counsel alone) does not appear at said OSC hearing, in order to seek and obtain additional time to retain a lawyer, the Complaint may be stricken, and the Answer to the Cross-Complaint may also be stricken. 

Moving party to give IMMEDIATE notice to the current contact person for the decedent and file a Proof of Service accordingly prior to 8/29/23, by reasonable means to effectuate actual notice of this ruling ASAP.

DISCUSSION:

Motion to be Relieved as Counsel

Legal Standard

For a motion to be relieved as counsel under CCP section 284, subdivision¿(2), California Rules of Court 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 CCP section 284(2) is brought instead of filing a consent under CCP 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, declaration, and proposed order on the client and on all other parties who have appeared in the case; and (4) the proposed order relieving counsel (prepared on the Order Granting Attorney’s Motion to be Relieved as Counsel – Civil form (MC-053)).¿ (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1362.)¿

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.)

Analysis

Counsel filed Civil forms MC-051, MC-052, and MC-053.  The moving papers were served on the client and opposing counsel by mail on July 24, 2023. (See Proof of Service.) Counsel confirmed the client’s address by telephone. (See MC-052, ¶ 3(b).)

It appears that Plaintiff is now deceased. In support of the motion, Counsel cites “a breakdown of attorney-client relationship as a result of Ms. Park's death.” (MC-052, ¶ 2.) No party has filed an opposition to this motion. “Good cause” has been adequately demonstrated by movant. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated:   August 25, 2023 ___________________________________