Judge Walter P. Schwarm, Case 30-2019-01076330 2023-08-15 Tentative Ruling

Judge: Walter P. Schwarm, Case: 30-2019-01076330, Date: 2023-08-15 Tentative Ruling

Motion No. 1:

Moving Counsel’s (Kenneth I. Gross) Motion to be Relieved as Counsel for Da Jen Gao (Motion), filed 6-29-23 under ROA No. 255, is GRANTED.

The court’s 7-25-23 Minute Order states, “These declarations do not comply with California Rules of Court, rule 3.1362(d)(2), because they do not state that the electronic service address is the client’s current electronic service address.”

Moving Counsel filed a Further Supplemental Declaration regarding service on 7-27-23 ROA No. 265. The Further Supplemental Declaration states, “The three Motions to be Relieved as Counsel, including the Declarations of Counsel and Proposed Orders were served on my clients electronically by serving Plaintiff Bin Sun at his e-mail addresses and his WeChat address. Bin Sun is the person I have communicated with during this case on behalf of all Plaintiffs, as they are all family members. [¶] The WeChat address I served the Motions and related papers to, is Mr. Sun’s current WeChat address, and his current electronic service address as of the filing of the Motions. This address was verified less than 30 days prior to filing the Motions when I received a WeChat message from Bin Sun, on June 5, 2023 from the WeChat address that I have always communicated with him at. That is the same WeChat address where the Motions, including the Declarations of Counsel and the Proposed Orders were served. [¶] I have received no communications from my clients since the June 5, 2023 WeChat from Bin Sun.” (Further Supplemental Decl., ¶¶ 2-4.)

The court heard this Motion again 8-8-23. The court’s 8-8-23 Minute Order sates, “Plaintiffs’ counsel shall submit a supplemental declaration for the Court, to be filed and served on Moving party's clients and Defendants on or before 08/09/23.”

On 8-8-23, Moving Counsel filed a Second Further Supplemental Declaration in support of the Motion. The Second Further Supplemental Declaration adds the following paragraph, “I and my office use WeChat to communicate in the same manner as e-mail, including attaching documents. I communicate with most clients of mine in China using WeChat, as this is the preferred manner of communication.” (Second Further Supplemental Decl., ¶ 4.)

The Court finds that the above is sufficient to demonstrate compliance with California Rules of Court, rule 3.1362(d)(2).

The Declaration in support of the Motion, filed on 6-28-23 under ROA No. 238, states in part, “. . . Plaintiff Sun has not responded to e-amils, WeChat messages and WeChat phone calls from counsel’s office in over 3 weeks and has not paid for expenses advanced on Plaintiff’s behalf despite several request. Counsel cannot continue with representation if there is no communication with Mr. Sun and expenses are not paid.” This declaration supports withdrawal under Professional Rules of Conduct, rule 1.16, subdivision (b)(4).

Moving Counsel shall be relieved as counsel of record effective upon the filing of the proof of service of the signed order upon Da Jen Gao.

Based on the above, the court GRANTS Moving Counsel’s (Kenneth I. Gross) Motion to be Relieved as Counsel for Da Jen Gao, filed 6-29-23 under ROA No. 255.

Moving Counsel is to give notice.

Motion No. 2:

Moving Counsel’s (Kenneth I. Gross)’ Motion to be Relieved as Counsel for Shiming Liang Pang (Motion), filed 6-29-23 under ROA No. 247, is GRANTED.

On 8-8-23, Moving Counsel filed a Second Further Supplemental Declaration in support of the Motion. The Second Further Supplemental Declaration adds the following paragraph: “I and my office use WeChat to communicate in the same manner as e-mail, including attaching documents. I communicate with most clients of mine in China using WeChat, as this is the preferred manner of communication.” (Second Further Supplemental Decl., ¶ 4.)

The Court finds that the above is sufficient to demonstrate compliance with California Rules of Court, rule 3.1362(d)(2).

The Declaration in support of the Motion, filed on 6-28-23 under ROA No. 236, states in part, “. . . Plaintiff Sun has not responded to e-amils, WeChat messages and WeChat phone calls from counsel’s office in over 3 weeks and has not paid for expenses advanced on Plaintiff’s behalf despite several request. Counsel cannot continue with representation if there is no communication with Mr. Sun and expenses are not paid.” This declaration supports withdrawal under Professional Rules of Conduct, rule 1.16, subdivision (b)(4).

Moving Counsel shall be relieved as counsel of record effective upon the filing of the proof of service of the signed order upon Shiming Liang Pang.

Based on the above, the court GRANTS Moving Counsel’s (Kenneth I. Gross) Motion to be Relieved as Counsel for Shiming Liang Pang, filed 6-29-23 under ROA No. 247.

Moving Counsel is to give notice.

Motion No. 3:

Moving Counsel’s (Kenneth I. Gross) Motion to be Relieved as Counsel for Bin Sun, filed 6-29-23 under ROA No. 245, is GRANTED.

The Court finds that the above is sufficient to demonstrate compliance with California Rules of Court, rule 3.1362(d)(2).

The Declaration in support of the Motion, filed on 6-28-23 under ROA No. 234, states in part, “. . . Plaintiff Sun has not responded to e-amils, WeChat messages and WeChat phone calls from counsel’s office in over 3 weeks and has not paid for expenses advanced on Plaintiff’s behalf despite several request. Counsel cannot continue with representation if there is no communication with Mr. Sun and expenses are not paid.” This declaration supports withdrawal under Professional Rules of Conduct, rule 1.16, subdivision (b)(4).

Moving Counsel shall be relieved as counsel of record effective upon the filing of the proof of service of the signed order upon Bin Sun.

Based on the above, Moving Counsel’s (Kenneth I. Gross) Motion to be Relieved as Counsel for Bin Sun, filed 6-29-23 under ROA No. 245, is GRANTED.

Moving Counsel is to give notice.

The court finds good cause to continue the trial date based to allow Plaintiffs an opportunity to obtain counsel to represent them at trial. The court will discuss a new trial date at the hearing on 8-15-23.