Judge: Steven A. Ellis, Case: 23STCV18137, Date: 2025-05-02 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 23STCV18137    Hearing Date: May 2, 2025    Dept: 29

Muhammad v. Moya
23STCV18137
Motion to be Relieved as Counsel filed by Plaintiffs’ counsel Igor Fradkin, Esq.

Tentative

The motion is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE (untimely proof of service).

Background

On August 1, 2023, Ka-Niya Muhammad, a minor by and through her guardian ad litem Shemeka Jordan, and Kev-Ijanah Muhammad, a minor by and through her guardian ad litem Shemeka Jordan (collectively “Plaintiffs”), filed a complaint against Walter Fernando Moya, Rockview Dairies, Inc., Rockview Farms (collectively, “Defendants”), Caterer’s Leasing, Inc., and Does 1 through 50 for motor vehicle negligence and general negligence arising out of an accident on October 10, 2018, at or near the intersection of Slauson Avenue and Gage Avenue in Commerce.

On April 5, 2024, Defendants filed an answer.

On April 9, 2025, Igor Fradkin, Esq. (“Counsel”) filed a motion to be relieved as counsel for Plaintiffs.

No opposition has been filed.

Trial is set for July 28, 2025.

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 3.136(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.

The service of the motion, however, was untimely.  For a hearing on May 2, 2025, the last day for personal service (16 court days before the hearing) was on April 10, 2025.  Because Plaintiffs were served by mail, 5 additional days must be added; the last day to serve this motion by mail was April 5, 2025.  According to the proof of service filed with the motion, Plaintiffs were served by mail on April 9.

The Court further notes that a motion to be relieved should be filed for each plaintiff. On the notice of motion Counsel incorrectly selected that Plaintiffs are individuals when in fact both are represented by guardian ad litem; the guardian ad litem option on item 4 should be selected.

Lastly, Counsel’s proposed order is incomplete.

Accordingly, the motion is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.

Conclusion

The motion to be relieved as counsel is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.