Creditors Adjustment Bureau, Inc. v. JC&J Construction Inc. aka JC&J Construction

MOTION TO BE RELIEVED AS COUNSEL FOR DEFENDANT JC&J CONSTRUCTION, INC.

 

MOVING PARTY: Jorge Ledezma (counsel for Defendant JC&J Construction, Inc.)

RESPONDING PARTY(S): Plaintiff Creditors Adjustment Bureau, Inc.

STATEMENT OF MATERIAL FACTS AND/OR PROCEEDINGS:

Plaintiff Creditors Adjustment Bureau, Inc., is the assignee of debts from the State Compensation Insurance Fund. Plaintiff brings this action to collect on the debts from Defendant JC&J Construction, Inc., owed as premiums pursuant to a written agreement to provide workers compensation insurance to Defendant. Plaintiff asserts causes of action for (1) breach of contract, (2) open book account, (3) account stated, and (4) reasonable value.

Jorge Ledezma now moves to be relieved as counsel for Defendant JC&J Construction, Inc. Plaintiff opposed. 

TENTATIVE RULING:

Counsel’s Motion to be Relieved as Counsel for Defendant JC&J Construction 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 4/7/25 at 8:30 a.m.  IF THE ENTITY DEFENDANT DOES NOT HAVE A NEW ATTORNEY OF RECORD BY THAT DATE, ITS ANSWER MAY BE STRICKEN.

Withdrawing counsel is ordered 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 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.  Counsel served the moving papers on the client by mail on December 18, 2024. (See Proof of Service.)  Counsel has confirmed the clients address within the last 30-days by telephone. (Form MC-052 ¶ 3(b).)

In support of withdrawal, Counsel attests that “[a]n irreparable breakdown of attorney-client relationship has occurred that makes it impossible for attorney to represent this client.” (Form MC-052, ¶ 2.)

Plaintiff opposes the motion to be relieved. Plaintiff argues that counsel should not be relieved until he pays the $3,148.00 discovery sanction imposed against him, which remains unpaid. (Brown Decl. ¶ 4; see also 11/1/2023 Minute Order.) 

Here, “good cause” has been adequately demonstrated by Counsel.  In addition, there is no obvious undue prejudice to the clients or any other party if counsel is relieved at this time. No trial date has been set in this matter. 

As to the sanction against withdrawing counsel, Plaintiff may enforce the sanction by whatever means may be provided by law.  However, the court declines to require payment of that sanction as a condition of withdrawal, as expressly requested in Plaintiff’s opposition.

This Court recognizes that it likely does have the sound discretion to issue such a conditional order, but it respectfully declines to do so for several reason:  First and foremost, the amount of sanctions owed is somewhat de minimus, to wit, a few thousand dollars.  Next, the Plaintiff is a collection agency with lawyers who specialize in collections.  If anyone knows how to collect a debt, the Plaintiff and its lawyers do.  Indeed, they have amply demonstrated this fact in this case;  the sanctions has been reduced to a collectable judgment, and the Plaintiff has actually noticed a judgment debtor’s examination for this April.   

Frankly, it doesn’t appear that the Plaintiff is going to excuse this debt by any longshot.  Hence, its claim that the debt will be forgotten seems unlikely. Opposition, 3:1-3 [“out-of-sight, out-of-mind”]

Accordingly, the motion is GRANTED without the requested condition.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated:   January 29, 2025 ___________________________________