Judge: Upinder S. Kalra, Case: 23STCV08344, Date: 2024-02-29 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 23STCV08344    Hearing Date: March 21, 2024    Dept: 51

Tentative Ruling

Judge Upinder S. Kalra, Department 51

HEARING DATE:   February 29, 2024                                          

CASE NAME:           Quetzal Salcido v. Eric Martirosyan, et al.

CASE NO.:                23STCV08344

MOTION TO BE RELIEVED AS COUNSEL

MOVING PARTY:  Attorney RoseAnn Frazee

RESPONDING PARTY(S): None as of February 26, 2024

REQUESTED RELIEF:

1.      An Order granting Attorney’s Motion to be Relieved as Counsel for Plaintiff Patricia Salcido as administrator of Patricia Salcido-Alvonistis’s Estate.

TENTATIVE RULING:

1.      Motion to be Relieved as Counsel is GRANTED.

STATEMENT OF MATERIAL FACTS AND/OR PROCEEDINGS:

On April 14, 2023, Plaintiff Quetzal Salcido, as Administrator of Patricia Salcido-Alvonistis’s Estate (Plaintiff) filed a Complaint against Defendants Eric Maritrosyan and E&E Ristorante Group, Inc. (Defendant) for breach of contract. According to the Complaint, the parties entered into a written lease on July 12, 2013.¹ Defendants failed to pay rent since October 2020 and failed to pay any property taxes as required by the lease. Plaintiff attached a copy of the lease. 

Cross-Complainants filed a First Amended Cross-Complaint (FACC) on August 8, 2023, with two causes of action for: (1) Breach of Lease; and (2) Fraud in the Inducement.  

Cross-Complainants allege that they entered a lease with Patricia Salcido Alvonitis (Patricia) on July 15, 2013, to operate a restaurant at 2861 W. Sunset Boulevard, Los Angeles, CA 90026 (Premises). Cross-Complainant alleges that due to a confidentiality term they did not attach the lease to their Cross-Complaint. The Premises needed serious and substantial capital improvements and repairs. Cross-Complainants allege that prior to entering into the lease, they and Patricia discussed the Premises’ condition in person and by phone. During these conversations, Patricia told Cross-Complainants that if they were willing to finance full remodeling of the Premises, then (a) they would be given the right to extend the lease a five-year option term, (b) if any repair (not maintenance) was necessary during the tenancy it would be split 50/50, and (c) any repair or replacement of any part of the Premises apart from the building would solely be Lessor’s responsibility (collectively, the Representations).  

On September 26, 2023, Plaintiff/Cross-Defendant filed a Demurrer to the First Amended Cross-Complaint.

On February 1, 2024, the court continued the hearing on the Demurrer to the First Amended Cross-Complaint to February 29, 2024 as a motion setting date. The court also set a Case Management Conference and Status Conference re: Status of Counsel for Plaintiff on that same date.

On February 2, 2024, Attorney Frazee filed a Declaration in Support of Attorney’s Motion to be Relieved as Counsel.

On February 5, 2024, Attorney Frazee filed the instant Motion to be Relieved as Counsel.

On February 29, 2024, the court continued the hearing on Attorney Frazee’s Motion to be Relieved as Counsel to March 21, 2024 to ensure compliance with California Rules of Court.

On March 1, 2024, Attorney Frazee filed proof of service indicating service of the Motion to be Relieved as Counsel on February 2, 2024, as well as Notice of the Court’s February 29, 2024 Ruling.

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,¿subd. (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 3.1362(a)), MC-052 (Declaration) (Cal. Rules of Court 3.1362(c)), and MC-053 (Proposed Order) (Cal. Rules of Court 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 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 3.1362(e).)¿ 

ANALYSIS:

Attorney RoseAnn Frazee moves to be relieved as counsel for Plaintiff Quetzal Salcido, as Administrator of Patricia Salcido-Alvonistis’s Estate. Attorney Frazee indicates that the client fired her and she has been unable to secure a Substitution of Attorney for the new counsel, that Client would not respond to communications from attorney, and would not confirm his address. Attorney Frazee indicates they mailed the instant motion and supporting documents to Client’s last known address on February 2, 2024.

Accordingly, the court GRANTS Attorney Frazee’s motion to be relieved as counsel.

CONCLUSION:

            For the foregoing reasons, the Court decides the pending motion as follows:

1.Motion to be Relieved as Counsel is GRANTED.

Moving party is to give notice.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated:             March 21, 2024                       __________________________________                                                                                                                Upinder S. Kalra

                                                                                    Judge of the Superior Court