Judge: William A. Crowfoot, Case: 20STCV24124, Date: 2022-09-01 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 20STCV24124    Hearing Date: September 1, 2022    Dept: 27

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - CENTRAL DISTRICT

I.         BACKGROUND

On June 25, 2020, Plaintiff Dilip Amthabhai (“Plaintiff”) filed this action against Defendants Vivian La and Stephen Lam (collectively, “Defendants”), alleging one cause of action for negligence.  

The Complaint alleges the following. On July 19, 2018, Plaintiff was operating a vehicle traveling northbound on Colina Road, in the city of Hacienda Heights, California. (Compl., ¶ 9.) Plaintiff was stopped at a traffic light when Defendant Vivian La, operating her vehicle and traveling northbound on Colima Road, rear-ended Plaintiff’s vehicle. (Compl., ¶¶ 9, 10.) As a result of the incident, Plaintiff sustained substantial injuries including to a lumbar spine sprain/strain. (Compl., ¶ 13.)

On July 29, 2022, Plaintiff’s counsel of record, Pius Joseph Esq. of Pius Joseph, a Professional Law Corporation (“Plaintiff’s Counsel”), filed the instant motion to be relieved as counsel.

No opposition to the motion has been filed.

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.’” (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. Sturdevant (1994) 21 Cal.App.4th 904, 915.)    

For a motion to be relieved as counsel under Code of Civil Procedure section 284, subdivision (2), California Rules of Court, rule 3.1362 requires (1) a notice of motion and motion directed to the client (made on the Notice of Motion and Motion to be Relieved as Counsel -- Civil 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(2) is brought instead of filing a consent under Code of Civil Procedure section 284(1) (made on the Declaration in Support of Attorney’s Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel -- Civil form (MC-052)); (3) 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) the proposed order relieving counsel (prepared on the Order Granting Attorney’s Motion to be Relieved as Counsel -- Civil form (MC-053)).

III.      DISCUSSION

The court finds that Plaintiff’s Counsel has complied with the applicable rules. Plaintiff’s counsel has also provided sufficient grounds for granting the relief requested. Plaintiff’s Counsel states that irreconcilable differences with regards to the representation have arisen and that Plaintiff has failed to disclose information vital to representation in this matter. (Motion, Declaration in Support of Attorney’s Motion to be Relieved as Counsel (MC-052), Item 2.)  

Accordingly, the Court grants Pius Joseph Esq.’s motion to be relieved as Plaintiff’s counsel of record.

IV.      CONCLUSION

          The Motion to be Relieved as Counsel is GRANTED.

Pius Joseph, Esq. will be relieved as counsel of record for Plaintiff Dilip Amthabhai upon counsel’s filing of Proof of Service of the signed “Order Granting Attorney’s Motion to be Relieved as Counsel – Civil.”

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.