Judge: William A. Crowfoot, Case: 20STCV17105, Date: 2022-08-22 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 20STCV17105    Hearing Date: August 22, 2022    Dept: 27

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - CENTRAL DISTRICT

I.         BACKGROUND

On May 5, 2020, Latif Diop and Daouia Amrir (collectively, “Plaintiffs”) initiated the present action by filing a Complaint against Faith Ernest and Does 1 through 10.

On November 4, 2020, Plaintiffs filed the operative First Amended Complaint against Faith Ernest, Solange Pace, and Does 1 through 10 (collectively, “Defendants”)  Plaintiffs’ First Amended Complaint alleges the following causes of action: (1) General Negligence; and (2) Motor Vehicle Negligence.  Plaintiff’s First Amended Complaint arises from personal injuries sustained by Plaintiffs following two (2) separate motor vehicle accidents involving Defendant Faith Ernest on May 8, 2018, and Defendant Solange Pace on November 9, 2018.

On January 7, 2022, Plaintiffs filed an Amendment to Complaint (Fictitious/Incorrect Name), substituting Defendant Lyft, Inc. for Doe 1.

On June 14, 2022, Tofer and Associates and James Doyle, Esq. of Tofer & Associates filed a Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel (hereinafter, “Motion”), moving to be relieved as counsel for Plaintiff Daouia Amrir (“Plaintiff Amrir”) only.

On July 21, 2022,  Tofer and Associates filed a Petition to Take Motion To Be Relieved as Counsel Off Calendar.

On July 22, 2022, Tofer and Associates and James Doyle, Esq. of Tofer and Associates’ Motion came before the Court for hearing.  There were no appearances by either party on the date of hearing.  Following review of the moving papers, the Court found the Motion complied with California Rules of Court, Rule 3.1362 and, as trial in this action is set for April 10, 2023, Plaintiff Amrir would not suffer prejudice as a result of withdrawal.  However, the Court noted the Proposed Order filed alongside the Motion included “incorrect" information.  As a result, the Court continued the hearing upon the Motion for the purpose of allowing Tofer and Associates and James Doyle, Esq. of Tofer and Associates to submit a corrected Proposed Order.

The Court now considers Tofer and Associates and James Doyle, Esq. of Tofer and Associates’ Motion following the above-mentioned continuance of hearing.

II.        LEGAL STANDARD

          “The question of granting or denying an application of an attorney to withdraw as counsel (Code Civ. Proc., § 284, subd. (2)) is one which lies within the sound discretion of the trial court ‘having in mind whether such withdrawal might work an injustice in the handling of the case.’  [Citation.]”  (People v. Prince (1968) 268 Cal.App.2d 398, 406 [internal quotations omitted].)  The court should also consider whether the attorney’s “withdrawal can be accomplished without undue prejudice to the client’s interests.”  (Ramirez v. Sturdivant (1994) 21 Cal.App.4th 904, 915.)

          California Rules of Court, rule 3.1362 requires that the following be submitted in support of an attorney’s Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel pursuant Code of Civil Procedure section 284, subdivision (2): (1) a notice of motion and motion directed to the client (made on Notice of Motion and Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel—Civil (Judicial Council Form, MC-051)); (2) a declaration stating in general terms and without compromising the confidentiality of the attorney-client relationship why a motion under Code of Civil Procedure section 284, subdivision (2) is brought instead of filing a consent under Code of Civil Procedure section 284, subdivision (1) (made on Declaration in Support of Attorney’s Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel—Civil (Judicial Council Form, MC-052)); (3) a proof of service evidencing service of the notice of motion and motion, declaration, and proposed order on the client and on all other parties who have appeared in the case; and (4) a proposed order relieving counsel (prepared on Order Granting Attorney’s Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel—Civil (Judicial Council Form, MC-053)).  (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1362, subd. (a), (c), (d), (e).)

III.      DISCUSSION

          Tofer and Associates and James Doyle, Esq. of Tofer & Associates (“Plaintiff’s Counsel”) have filed a Motion To Be Relieved as Counsel, effectively moving to be relieved as counsel of record for Plaintiff Daouia Amrir (“Plaintiff Amrir”).  Due to reasons more fully described in the paragraphs below, the Court is presently unable to approve Plaintiff’s Counsel’s Motion To Be Relieved as Counsel.

          First, the Court recognizes Plaintiff’s Counsel has failed to submit a corrected Proposed Order, as instructed within the Minute Order issued following the Court’s consideration of Plaintiff’s Counsel’s Motion on July 22, 2022.  (Minute Order Re: Hearing on Motion to be Relieved as Counsel, filed July 22, 2022, at p. 1 [“The motion to be relieved was filed prior to the filing and granting of a stipulation to continue the trial. Accordingly, the information contained in the proposed order is incorrect. To permit moving party to submit a correct Proposed Order, [o]n the Court's own motion, the Hearing on Motion to be Relieved as Counsel scheduled for 07/22/2022 is continued to 08/22/2022 at 01:30 PM in Department 27 at Spring Street Courthouse.”].)  As of the Court’s preparation of this tentative ruling, Plaintiff’s Counsel has failed to submit a revised Proposed Order, in compliance with the Court’s Order.

          Secondly, based upon Plaintiff’s Counsel’s filing of a “Petition to Take Motion To Be Relieved as Counsel Off Calendar”, the Court opines that Plaintiff’s Counsel has operatively withdrawn the present Motion from the Court’s consideration.  The Court’s opinion is additionally supported by the fact that Plaintiff’s Counsel’s failed to appear on the initial hearing date, and Plaintiff’s Counsel’s has failed to file an amended Proposed Order for the purposes of obtaining approval of the present Motion.  Accordingly, the Court finds Plaintiff’s Counsel has effectively withdrawn the present Motion from the Court’s calendar.

          Based on the foregoing, Plaintiff’s Counsel’s Motion To Be Relieved as Counsel is DENIED.

IV.      CONCLUSION

            Tofer and Associates and James Doyle, Esq. of Tofer & Associates’ Motion To Be Relieved as Counsel is DENIED, without prejudice.

Moving party to give notice. 

            Parties who intend to submit on this tentative must send an email to the Court at SSCDEPT27@lacourt.org indicating intention to submit on the tentative as directed by the instructions provided on the court’s website at www.lacourt.org.  Please be advised that if you submit on the tentative and elect not to appear at the hearing, the opposing party may nevertheless appear at the hearing and argue the matter.  Unless you receive a submission from all other parties in the matter, you should assume that others might appear at the hearing to argue.  If the Court does not receive emails from the parties indicating submission on this tentative ruling and there are no appearances at the hearing, the Court may, at its discretion, adopt the tentative as the final order or place the motion off calendar.