Jonathan Robin v. Emil Udi Ganon, et al.

(1) MOTION TO BE RELIEVED AS COUNSEL FOR DEFENDANT EMIL UDI GANON, AN INDIVIDUAL

(2) MOTION TO BE RELIEVED AS COUNSEL FOR DEFENDANT EMIL UDI GANON, AS TRUSTEE OF THE EMIL GANON REVOCABLE 2019 TRUST

 

MOVING PARTY: Eric J. Lorenzini (counsel for Defendants Emil Udi Ganon, an individual; and Emil Udi Ganon, as Trustee of the Emil Ganon Revocable 2019 Trust)

RESPONDING PARTY(S): None

STATEMENT OF MATERIAL FACTS AND/OR PROCEEDINGS:

Plaintiff Jonathan Robin alleges he provided management services under a written contract with respect to the construction and development of a project owned by Defendants Emil Udi Ganon and the Emil Udi Ganon Revocable 2019 Trust. Plaintiff alleges Defendants have failed to pay Plaintiff all monies owed. Plaintiff brings causes of action against Defendants for (1) foreclosure of mechanic’s lien, (2) breach of contract, (3) breach of oral contract, (4) open book, (5) account stated, and (6) reasonable value of labor furnished.

Eric J. Lorenzini, counsel for Defendants, now moves to be relieved as counsel. The motions are unopposed.

TENTATIVE RULING:

Counsel’s Motion to be Relieved as Counsel for individual Defendant Emil Udi Ganon is GRANTED.

Counsel’s motion to be Relieved as Counsel for Defendant Emil Udi Ganon as Trustee of the Emil Ganon Revocable 2019 Trust is GRANTED on the condition that Counsel submit a new Order (MC-053) which indicates that the next hearing will be an OSC re; Striking of Answer on 11/15/23 at 8:30 a.m.  IF THE TRUST DEFENDANT DOES NOT HAVE A NEW ATTORNEY OF RECORD BY THAT DATE, ITS ANSWER MAY BE STRICKEN.

Moving party to give notice.

DISCUSSION:

Motion to be Relieved as Counsel

A. 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 undue 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.)

B. Analysis

Counsel filed Civil forms MC-051, MC-052, and MC-053 for each Defendant.  Counsel served the moving papers on the clients by mail and on September 21, 2023. (See Proof of Service.)  Counsel confirmed receipt of the moving papers by email communication with the clients.  (Forms MC-052 ¶ 3(b).)

Counsel attests that “one or more factual circumstances described in Cal. Rule Prof Conduct 1.16(b) exist, such that withdrawal is appropriate.” (MC-052, ¶ 2.) The clients have declined to consent to the withdrawal. (Id.)

There is no opposition to this motion. “Good cause” has been adequately demonstrated by Counsel.  In addition, there is no obvious undue  prejudice to Defendants if counsel is relieved at this time.

Accordingly, Counsel’s Motion to be Relieved as Counsel for individual Defendant Emil Udi Ganon is GRANTED.

Moving party to give notice.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated:   October 18, 2023 ___________________________________