Judge: Theresa M. Traber, Case: 24STCV28273, Date: 2025-06-12 Tentative Ruling
Case Number: 24STCV28273 Hearing Date: June 12, 2025 Dept: 47
Tentative Ruling
Judge Theresa M. Traber, Department 47
HEARING DATE: June 12, 2025 TRIAL DATE: NOT
SET
CASE: Lonnie Levin v. Stachs LLC d/b/a Eaze
CASE NO.: 24STCV28273
MOTION
TO BE RELIEVED AS COUNSEL
MOVING PARTY: Attorney Aaron Nesbit, counsel for Defendant
RESPONDING PARTY(S): No response on
eCourt as of June 9, 2025.
CASE
HISTORY:
·
10/29/24: Complaint filed.
·
03/24/25: Bankruptcy Stay.
STATEMENT
OF MATERIAL FACTS AND/OR PROCEEDINGS:
This is a wage and hour and wrongful termination action. Plaintiff
alleges that he was systematically underpaid and was terminated in retaliation
for complaining about the wage and hour violations.
Attorney Aaron Nesbit, counsel for
Defendant, moves to be relieved as counsel.
TENTATIVE RULING:
Attorney Aaron Nesbit, counsel for
Defendant, moves to be relieved as counsel.
Moving counsel filed all three required forms (MC-051,
-052, and -053) and states under penalty of perjury that the papers were served
by mail at Defendant’s last known address. (MC-052 Attach. ¶ 5.). Moving
counsel states that he confirmed that the address was current by telephone.
(MC-052 ¶ 3(b).)
In general, an attorney may withdraw with
or without cause as long as the withdrawal would not result in undue prejudice
to the client’s interest – i.e., counsel cannot withdraw at a critical point in
the litigation, because that would prejudice client, but can withdraw
otherwise. (Ramirez v. Sturdevant (1994) 21 Cal. App. 4th 904,
915.) The court has discretion to deny an attorney’s request to withdraw where
the withdrawal would work an injustice or cause undue delay in the proceeding,
but the court’s discretion in this area is one to be exercised reasonably. (Mandell
v. Superior Court (1977) 67 Cal.App.3d 1, 4.)
Here, trial in this matter is not
yet set, and the only other hearings are a Case Management Conference set to
coincide with this motion and a Non-Appearance Case Review regarding the
bankruptcy proceeding. (See MC-052 ¶¶ 4-6.) The risk of prejudice to Defendant is
therefore minimal. Moving Counsel states that withdrawal is necessary because Defendant
has been dissolved in bankruptcy and can no longer pay for legal services.
(MC-052 Attach. ¶ 4.) In light of the low risk of prejudice to the Defendant at
this juncture, the Court finds that Moving Counsel has demonstrated good cause
for withdrawal.
Accordingly, Attorney Aaron Nesbit’s
Motion to be Relieved as Counsel for Defendant is GRANTED.
This ruling is conditioned on Moving Counsel giving notice to
all parties and filing proof of service with the Court.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: June 12, 2025 ___________________________________
Theresa
M. Traber
Judge
of the Superior Court
Any party may submit on the
tentative ruling by contacting the courtroom via email at Smcdept47@lacourt.org by no later than 4:00 p.m. the day
before the hearing. All interested parties must be copied on the email. It
should be noted that if you submit on a tentative ruling the court will still
conduct a hearing if any party appears. By submitting on the tentative you
have, in essence, waived your right to be present at the hearing, and you
should be aware that the court may not adopt the tentative, and may issue an
order which modifies the tentative ruling in whole or in part.