Gloria Martin, et al. v. Elizabeth Buraye

(1) MOTION TO BE RELIEVED AS COUNSEL FOR PLAINTIFF ESAUL MARTIN

(2) MOTION TO BE RELIEVED AS COUNSEL FOR PLAINTIFF GLORIA MARTIN

 

MOVING PARTY: T. Michael Fehmel (counsel for Plaintiffs Esaul and Gloria Martin)

RESPONDING PARTY(S): None

STATEMENT OF MATERIAL FACTS AND/OR PROCEEDINGS:

Plaintiffs Gloria and Esaul Martin brings this action against Defendant Elizabeth Buraye, an insurance broker, for breach of fiduciary duty, professional negligence, and negligent misrepresentation following a burglary of their home. Plaintiffs allege Defendant failed to obtain a homeowners insurance policy that would sufficiently cover Plaintiff’s personal property or possessions. 

T. Michael Fehmel, counsel for Plaintiffs, now moves to be relieved as counsel.  The motion is unopposed.

TENTATIVE RULING:

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

Moving counsel is ordered to give notice.

DISCUSSION:

Motions 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 for each Plaintiff. Counsel served the moving papers on the clients by mail on November 19, 2024. (See Proofs of Service.)  Counsel confirmed that the address is current within the last 30-days by conversation. (Forms MC-052, ¶ 3(b).)

In support of withdrawal, counsel attests that there “exists a conflict of interest [between counsel and clients] concerning how to proceed in this matter.” (See Forms MC-052, ¶ 2.) Counsel also attests to a lack of communication that prevents him from preparing the case for trial. (Id.) 

There are no oppositions to the motions. “Good cause” has been adequately demonstrated by Counsel.  In addition, there is no obvious prejudice to the clients if counsel is relieved at this time. 

Accordingly, Counsel’s Motion to be Relieved as Counsel for Plaintiffs is GRANTED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated:   December 19, 2024 ___________________________________