Judge: Thomas Falls, Case: 20PSCV00636, Date: 2022-10-31 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. R at 909-802-1117 before 8:30 the morning of the hearing.

Case Number: 20PSCV00636    Hearing Date: October 31, 2022    Dept: R

TRANPLUS UNION, INC., A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION vs TAOMORE SUPPLY CHAIN LTD.A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION (20PSCV00636)

________________________________________________________________________

Defense Attorney Richard Liu’s Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel

            Responding Party: Unopposed (due 9 court days before hearing, 10/18)

Tentative Ruling

Defense Attorney Richard Liu’s Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel, is GRANTED effective upon [see below]

Background

This is a tortious interference case. Plaintiff TRANPLUS UNION, INC alleges the following against Defendant Taomore: In July 2020, Plaintiff contracted with Defendant to pick up Container No. BEAU5013245 (“Container 1”) for storage in Defendant’s warehouse and the later delivery to the ultimate end user for the contract price of approximately $1,300.00. After the containers (including Container No. FFAU1106772 (“Container 2”)) were picked up by Defendant, Defendant notified Plaintiff that due to some of its own payment disputes with Defendant’s trucking company, Pacific, Pacific had asserted a warehouseman/carrier’s lien over all of Defendant’s containers in Pacific’s possession, including Plaintiff’s Container 1. Ultimately, Plaintiff paid Pacific for Container 1. Defendant also refuses to return or deliver Container 2 to Plaintiff.

On August 30, 2020, Plaintiff filed suit for:

1.       BREACH OF CONTRACT; 2. BREACH OF CONTRACT; 3. CONVERSION; 4. COMMON CARRIER LIABILITY; 5. TORTIOUS INTERFERENCE WITH CONTRACTUAL RELATIONSHIP; and 6. INTENTIONAL INTERFERENCE WITH PROSPECTIVE ECONOMIC ADVANTAGE.

On January 4, 2021, Defendant filed its Answer.

On June 25, 2021, Defendant filed a substitution of attorney, representing itself pro per.

On August 10, 2021, Defendant filed another substitution of attorney, hiring attorney Richard Liu as counsel.

On September 8, 2021, Plaintiff filed a substitution of attorney and an association of counsel.

On October 3, 2022, Defense Counsel filed the instant motion to be relieved as counsel.

Discussion

Defense Counsel moves to be relieved as counsel due to “irreconcilable differences” making it “unreasonably difficult” to perform his duties. As the case is relatively short-lived with no substantive motions[1] and Defendant has not filed an opposition to express any prejudice, the court finds good cause to grant the motion.

Conclusion