Judge: Thomas Falls, Case: 1, Date: 2023-01-06 Tentative Ruling

The Court may change tentative rulings at any time. Therefore, attorneys are advised to check this website to determine if any changes or updates have been made to the tentative ruling.

Counsel may submit on the tentative rulings by calling the clerk in Dept. O at 909-802-1126 before 8:30 the morning of the hearing. Submission on the tentative does not bind the court to adopt the tentative ruling at the hearing should the opposing party appear and convince the court of further modification during oral argument.

The Tentative Ruling is not an invitation, nor an opportunity, to file any further documents relative to the hearing in question. No such filing will be considered by the Court in the absence of permission first obtained following ex-parte application therefore.



Case Number: 1    Hearing Date: January 6, 2023    Dept: O

City of El Monte v. PI Properties No. 66, LLC, et al.                                                                        (20PSCV00885)

________________________________________________________________________

 

Defense Counsel Steve Luan’s Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel to Xingping Xu

 

            Responding Party: Unopposed

 

Tentative Ruling

 

Defense Counsel Steve Luan’s Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel to Xingping Xu is GRANTED, effective upon [see below].

 

Background

 

This case arises from the unlawful cultivation of marijuana discovered during a July 12, 2017 search of a Property.

 

On December 22, 2020, Plaintiff the City of El Monte filed suit against Xingping Xu, PI Properties No. 66, LLC (“Defendant PI”)[1] and Does 1 through 100 for:

 

            1. Narcotics Abatement,

            2. Public Nuisance,  

            3. Violation of El Monte Municipal Code,

            4. Violation of Unfair Competition Law, and

            5. Violation of MAUCRSA

 

On March 11, 2021, Plaintiff filed a Notice of Lis Pendens.

 

On May 13, 2021, Defendant PI Properties No. 66, LLC filed its Answer.

 

On August 12, 2021, Plaintiff filed a Request for Entry of Default Judgment against Defendant Xu.

 

On January 4, 2022, Defendant Xu filed his Answer.

 

On January 10, 2022, Defendant PI Properties No. 66, LLC filed a Motion to Strike (not Anti-SLAPP) without a Demurrer.

 

On February 3, 2022, the court heard oral argument on the Motion to Strike. The court denied the motion.

 

On March 25, 2022, Defendant filed a MJOP (“Motion”), which the court denied.

 

On November 29, 2022, Defense Counsel filed the instant Motion.

 

Discussion

 

Counsel seeks to be relieved as counsel because his client has ceased communications with him. As Counsel may not adequately represent his client without communication and a client’s participation, the court finds the motion meritorious as this amounts to the breakdown of the attorney-client relationship. To the extent that there is prejudice, it appears the client herself may be the contributing cause by her refusal to take counsel’s phone calls.

 

Conclusion

 

Based on the foregoing, the motion is granted effective upon the filing of proof of service of this court’s order relieving Counsel, sent to Plaintiff, Defendants, and all other parties who have appeared in the case.


            [1]           According to the Complaint: The City is informed and believes, and on that basis alleges, that Defendant Xingping Xu (“Xu”) is an individual residing in Los Angeles, California. Xu is and was at all times material to this action a resident and operator of the Property. (Complaint ¶4.) The City is informed and believes, and on that basis alleges, that Defendant PI Properties No. 66 LLC (“PI”) is a California limited liability Company with its principal place of business in Arcadia, California. PI is and was at all times material to this action an owner and operator of the Property. (Complaint ¶5.) As more clearly articulated in Plaintiff’s Opposition, “PI Properties owns and operates a warehouse in the City.” (Opp. p. 2:14-15.)