Judge: Steven A. Ellis, Case: 20STCV27304, Date: 2024-06-21 Tentative Ruling
Case Number: 20STCV27304 Hearing Date: June 21, 2024 Dept: 29
Motion to be Relieved as Counsel, filed by Defendant’s
Counsel Robert C. Hsu of Lexint Law Group.
Tentative
The Court will call this matter and hear from
counsel and the parties.
Background
This case arises out of an automobile
accident on July 22, 2018, on Azusa Avenue in West Covina, in which Felicidita
Tandug Tupas (“Decedent”) was killed and other plaintiffs were injured.
On July 21, 2020, Plaintiffs Wenro Tupas, Sr.
(individually and as successor-in-interest to Decedent); Felros Tupas Lim (individually
and as successor-in-interest to Decedent); Wenefredo Villacorta Lim; Mary Jane
Tupas Gonzales (as successor-in-interest to Decedent); Rowne Tandug Tupas (as
successor-in-interest to Decedent); and Wenro Tandug Tupas, Jr. (as successor-in-interest
to Decedent) (collectively “Plaintiffs”) filed the complaint in this
action. Plaintiffs allege causes of
action for strict liability and negligence against Toyota Motor Corporation,
Toyota Motor Sales, U.S.A., Inc., Toyota Motor North America, Inc., Toyota
Motor Engineering & Manufacturing North America, Inc, Seidner-Miller, Inc
dba Toyota of Glendora (collectively, the “Toyota Defendants”), Liang Liu, and
Does 1 through 100
On July 13, 2023, Defendant Liang Liu
(“Defendant”) filed an answer.
On May 10, 2024, the Court entered the
dismissal of the Toyota Defendants, with prejudice, at the request of
Plaintiffs.
On May 23, 2024, Robert
C. Hsu (“Counsel”) filed this motion to be relieved as counsel for Defendant.
No opposition has been filed.
Legal
Standard
The court may order that an attorney be changed or
substituted at any time before or after judgment or final determination upon
request by either client or attorney and after notice from one to the other.
(Code of Civ. Proc., § 284(b).) An attorney is permitted to withdraw where
conflicts between the attorney and client make it unreasonable to continue the
representation. (See Cal. Rules of Prof. Conduct 3-700(C)(1).) “The
determination whether to grant or deny a motion to withdraw as counsel lies
within the sound discretion of the trial court.” (Manfredi & Levine v.
Superior Court (1998) 66 Cal.App.4th 1128, 1133.)
An application to be relieved as counsel must be made on
Judicial Counsel Form MC-051 (Notice of Motion and Motion) (Cal. Rules of
Court, rule 3.1362(a)), MC-052 (Declaration) (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1362(c)),
and MC-053 (Proposed Order) (Cal. Rules of Court, rule
3.1362(e)).
Further, the requisite forms must be served on the client
and all other parties who have appeared in the case. (Cal. Rules of Court,
rule 3.1362(d).) The court may delay effective date of the order relieving
counsel until proof of service of a copy of the signed order on the client has
been filed with the court. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1362(e).)
Discussion
Counsel has
filed the Notice, Declaration, and Order to be Relieved as Counsel for Defendant.
Counsel has served these papers on Defendant as well as Plaintiffs. Counsel
contends Defendant has severed all communication with Counsel, making it
impossible for Counsel to continue to represent Defendant.
Counsel states
he was unable to confirm the address of Defendant, but attempted to confirm the
address via email. Trial has been continued to the same day as this motion, and
as such, the FSC and Trial dates on the Declaration and Order hearing dates are
incorrect.
Counsel has
satisfied the procedural requirements for a motion to be relieved. The Court is concerned, however, with the
potential prejudice to Defendant with granting the motion at this time.
The Court will
hear from counsel and the parties.
Conclusion
The Court will
hear from counsel and the parties.