Judge: Randolph M. Hammock, Case: 21STCV36007, Date: 2023-03-21 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 21STCV36007    Hearing Date: March 21, 2023    Dept: 49

Edwin Sanchez v. Sola Rentals, Inc., et al.


MOVING PARTY: Joseph Rocco Jones (Counsel for Plaintiff Edwin Sanchez)


Plaintiff Edwin Sanchez worked for Defendants SOLA Rentals, Inc., and Sola Impact Rental Company, Inc., as a maintenance laborer. Plaintiff alleges he regularly worked in excess of 40 hours, including weekends and holidays, all without overtime pay. Plaintiff also alleges he traveled for work in his own vehicle and that Defendants failed to reimburse his mileage. Plaintiff left his employment with Defendants following an on-the-job injury. Plaintiff brings causes of action for (1) failure to provide access to employee payroll and personnel records, (2) failure to pay overtime wages, (3) failure to provide meal and rest periods, (4) failure to provide itemized wage statements, and (5) violation of Labor Code section 2802.

Joseph Rocco Jones, Counsel for Plaintiff, now moves to be relieved as counsel. The motion is unopposed.


Counsel’s Motion to be Relieved as Counsel for Plaintiff is GRANTED.

Moving party to give notice.


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.)


Counsel filed Civil forms MC-051, MC-052, and MC-053. Counsel served the moving papers on the client by mail and electronically on February 15, 2023. (See Proof of Service.)  Counsel states he has been unable to confirm that Plaintiff’s mailing address is current, despite attempting to call the client by telephone.  (Form MC-052 ¶ 3.) Counsel conducted a search through Lexis Nexis public records database and attests that the client has previously been responsive at the email address(es) known to counsel and where the moving papers have also been served.  (Id.)

Counsel cites an “irreconcilable breakdown of the attorney client relationship such that counsel does not believe that he and his firm can continue to represent Plaintiff.” (MC-052, ¶ 2.) 

There is no opposition to this motion. “Good cause” has been adequately demonstrated by Counsel.  In addition, there is no obvious prejudice to Plaintiff if counsel is relieved at this time. Trial in this matter is not set until November 6, 2023, allowing Plaintiff time to retain new counsel, if he so chooses. 

Accordingly, Counsel’s Motion to be Relieved as Counsel for Plaintiff is GRANTED.
Moving party to give notice.


Dated:   March 21, 2023 ___________________________________
Randolph M. Hammock
Judge of the Superior Court