Judge: Randy Rhodes, Case: 18CHCV00045, Date: 2023-03-15 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 18CHCV00045    Hearing Date: March 15, 2023    Dept: F51

Dept. F-51¿ 

Date: 3/15/23 

Case #18CHCV00045 

MOTION TO BE RELIEVED AS COUNSEL

Motion filed: 2/7/23 

MOVING ATTORNEY: Arash Kahen (“Counsel”)

CLIENT: Defendant Vitali Elkabetz, an individual (“Defendant”) 

NOTICE: OK

RELIEF REQUESTED: An order relieving Counsel as attorney of record for Defendant. 

TENTATIVE RULING: The motion is denied without prejudice. 

In a civil action, an attorney may move to be relieved as counsel at any time during the proceedings after giving notice to his client. (Code Civ. Proc. § 284.) The moving attorney shall file with his motion: (1) a notice of the motion, directed to the client using Judicial Council form MC-051; (2) a declaration in support of the motion using Judicial Council form MC-052; and (3) a proposed order granting the motion; all to be served on the client and all other parties who have appeared in the case. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1362.)

In his declaration, the moving attorney is required to state “in general terms, and without compromising the confidentiality of the attorney-client relationship why a motion under Code of Civil Procedure section 284(2) is brought instead of filing a consent under Code of Civil Procedure section 284(1).” (Id., subd. (c).) The client must be provided no less than five days’ notice before hearing on the motion. An attorney may withdraw from a case when it can be accomplished without undue prejudice to the client’s interests. (Ramirez v. Sturdevant (1994) 21 Cal.App.4th 904, 915.) On the other hand, if the attorney withdraws at a critical point in the action, thereby prejudicing his client, he has violated his ethical duties. (Ibid.)

Here, Counsel filed and served this motion to be relieved as counsel for Defendant, and notice thereof, on 2/7/23. However, the motion is missing Judicial Council forms MC-051 and MC-052, Counsel’s declaration, and a proposed order. Moreover, the attached proof of service shows that Counsel served the motion by mail only on plaintiff’s counsel, and not on his client.

On 3/9/23, the Court heard the instant motion, and granted Counsel’s oral request for a continuance so that he may file his declaration. No additional documents have been filed to date.

Accordingly, the motion is both procedurally and substantively deficient, is therefore denied without prejudice.