Judge: Robert B. Broadbelt, Case: 23STCV02010, Date: 2024-08-19 Tentative Ruling
Case Number: 23STCV02010 Hearing Date: August 19, 2024 Dept: 53
Superior Court of California
County of Los Angeles – Central District
Department
53
|
vs. |
Case
No.: |
23STCV02010 |
|
|
|
|
|
Hearing
Date: |
August
19, 2024 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Time: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
[tentative]
Order RE: motion to be relieved as counsel for
defendant |
||
MOVING PARTY: Steve Aldaco and Law Office of
Steve Aldaco
RESPONDING PARTY: Unopposed
Motion to be Relieved as Counsel for Defendant
The court
considered the moving papers filed in connection with this motion. No opposition papers were filed.
DISCUSSION
Steve Aldaco and Law Office of Steve Aldaco (“Defendant’s Counsel”)
move to be relieved as counsel for defendant D T S Enterprise, Inc.
(“Defendant”) in this action.
“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 filed in connection with
this motion by mail at Defendant’s last known address, which Defendant’s
Counsel has been unable to confirm within the past 30 days is current or to
locate a more current address after making reasonable efforts to do so. (MC-052, ¶ 3, subds. (a)(2), (b)(2)(a),
(b)(2)(b), (b)(2)(c); Cal. Rules of Ct., rule 3.1362, subd. (d)(1)(B).) 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.)¿¿
However, Defendant’s Counsel did not
lodge a proposed order on Judicial Council form MC-053 with the court as required. (Cal. Rules of Ct., rule 3.1362, subd. (e)
[the proposed order “must be lodged with the court with the moving
papers”].) Thus, the court finds that it
is appropriate, and therefore exercises its discretion, to continue the hearing
on Defendant’s Counsel’s motion in order to give Defendant’s Counsel an
opportunity to lodge a proposed order with the court.
ORDER
The court orders that the hearing on
Steve Aldaco and Law Office of Steve Aldaco’s motion to be relieved as counsel for
defendant D T S Enterprise, Inc. is continued to September 6, 2024, at 10:00
a.m., in Department 53.
The court orders Steve Aldaco and
Law Office of Steve Aldaco (1) to give notice of this ruling to defendant D T S
Enterprise, Inc. and to all other parties who have appeared in this action, and
to file a proof of service of the notice of ruling with the court no later than
August 23, 2024, and (2) to lodge with the court and to serve on defendant D T
S Enterprise, Inc. and all other parties who have appeared in this action a
proposed order made on the mandatory “Order Granting Attorney’s Motion to Be
Relieved as Counsel-Civil” Judicial Council form (MC-053) no later than August
23, 2024.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED:
_____________________________
Robert
B. Broadbelt III
Judge
of the Superior Court