Judge: Robert B. Broadbelt, Case: 23STCV01019, Date: 2023-08-04 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 23STCV01019    Hearing Date: December 5, 2023    Dept: 53

Superior Court of California

County of Los Angeles – Central District

Department 53

MOVING PARTY:                W. Dan Lee

RESPONDING PARTY:       Plaintiff Angela Brown

Motion to be Relieved as Counsel for Defendant

The court considered the moving and opposition papers filed in connection with this motion.  No reply papers were filed.

DISCUSSION

W. Dan Lee (“Defendant’s Counsel”) moves to be relieved as counsel for defendant Smart Resources Nursing Registry (“Defendant”).

“The question of granting or denying an application of an attorney to withdraw as counsel (Code Civ. Proc., § 284, subd. 2) is one which lies within the sound discretion of the trial court ‘having in mind whether such withdrawal might work an injustice in the handling of the case.’”¿ (People v. Prince (1968) 268 Cal.App.2d 398, 406 [internal quotations omitted].)¿ The court should also consider whether the attorney’s “withdrawal can be accomplished without undue prejudice to the client’s interests.”¿ (Ramirez v. Sturdevant (1994) 21 Cal.App.4th 904, 915.)¿¿¿¿¿¿¿¿¿¿ 

For a motion to be relieved as counsel under Code of Civil Procedure 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 Code of Civil Procedure section 284, subdivision (2) is brought instead of filing a consent under Code of Civil Procedure section 284, subdivision (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)).¿¿  

The court finds that Defendant’s Counsel has served Defendant with the moving papers by mail at Defendant’s last known address, which Defendant’s Counsel has confirmed within the past 30 days is current.  (MC-052, ¶ 3, subds. (a)(2), (b)(1)(a).)  The court also finds that Defendant’s Counsel has shown sufficient reasons why the motion should be granted, and why counsel has brought the motion under Code of Civil Procedure section 284, subdivision (2) instead of filing a consent under section 284, subdivision (1).¿ (MC-052, ¶¿2.) 

Plaintiff Angela Brown (“Plaintiff”) has filed an opposition to Defendant’s Counsel’s motion, arguing that the court should deny the motion because (1) Plaintiff filed, on November 20, 2023, two motions to compel Defendant’s further responses to discovery, both of which seek sanctions against Defendant’s Counsel, and (2) Defendant’s Counsel did not provide sufficient reasons explaining why a consent was not filed.  The court disagrees.

First, although the court notes that Plaintiff has two pending motions to compel further discovery responses, Plaintiff has not cited any authority supporting her request that the court deny Defendant’s Counsel’s motion to be relieved as counsel on that ground.  Second, the court finds that Defendant’s Counsel has provided a sufficient declaration in support of the motion, in which Defendant’s Counsel has stated that withdrawal is necessary “due to irreconcilable differences between the attorney and the client.”  (MC-052, ¶ 2.)

The court therefore grants Defendant’s Counsel’s motion to be relieved as counsel for Defendant.

The court, however, notes that the proposed “Order Granting Attorney’s Motion to be Relieved as Counsel – Civil” is incomplete, because it does not state Defendant’s current or last known address and telephone number.  The court will require Defendant’s Counsel to provide Defendant’s current or last known address and telephone number at the hearing on this motion.

W. Dan Lee will be relieved as counsel of record for defendant Smart Resources Nursing Registry effective upon the filing of the signed “Order Granting Attorney’s Motion to be Relieved as Counsel – Civil” on the client.

The court orders W. Dan Lee to give notice of this ruling and the signed “Order Granting Attorney’s Motion to be Relieved as Counsel – Civil” to defendant Smart Resources Nursing Registry and to all other parties who have appeared in this action.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED:  December 5, 2023

_____________________________

Robert B. Broadbelt III

Judge of the Superior Court