Judge: William A. Crowfoot, Case: 21STCV26018, Date: 2023-01-06 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 21STCV26018    Hearing Date: January 6, 2023    Dept: 27

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - CENTRAL DISTRICT

I.         BACKGROUND

This case arises out of a car accident that occurred in 2019.

On June 15, 2021, Plaintiff Ruth Cuellar (“Plaintiff”) filed a complaint against Dat Tran (“Defendant”) alleging negligence. 

Trial was previously set for January 12, 2023. On September 28, 2022, Owili Eison of Banafsheh Danesh & Javid, P.C., filed a motion to be relieved as Plaintiff’s counsel. On November 4, 2022, that motion was denied due to the proximity of trial and concern that granting the motion would result in prejudice to Plaintiff.

On November 29, 2022, the parties stipulated to continue the trial to September 11, 2023.

On December 6, 2022, Tina Abdolhosseini of Banafsheh Danesh & Javid, P.C. filed this Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel (hereinafter, “Motion”) for Plaintiff. No opposition was 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.’  [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

          Tina Abdolhosseini, counsel for Plaintiff Ruth Cuellar, requests to be relieved as counsel.

          Procedurally, Abdolhosseini has filed the necessary papers in accordance with CRC, rule 3.1362. Abdolhosseini filed a Notice of Motion and Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel on December 6, 2022. (Judicial Council Form, MC-051). That same day, Abdolhosseini also filed a Declaration in Support of the Motion in which she contends that her attorney-client relationship with Plaintiff has suffered “a significant breakdown… which has significantly impeded counsel's ability to effectively prosecute this case and represent Plaintiff's interest.” (Judicial Council Form, MC-053, pg. 1, sec. 2). Abdolhosseini also filed a Proposed Order Granting the Motion. (Judicial Council Form, MC-053). Abdolhosseini filed proof of service of all three documents on both Plaintiff and Defendants’ counsel. (POS-030).

          On the merits of the motion, the Court finds that no injustice will result from granting Abdolhosseini’s motion to be relieved as counsel. The Court previously denied Plaintiff’s motion solely because it found there was insufficient time before trial to avoid prejudicing Plaintiff. Since that ruling, the parties have stipulated to continuing the trial date, which is now set for September 11, 2023. Therefore, there is ample time for Plaintiff to prepare for trial and avoid suffering prejudice.

          Based on the foregoing, Plaintiff’s Counsel’s Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel is GRANTED.

IV.      CONCLUSION

            Tina Abdolhosseini of Banafsheh Danesh & Javid, P.C.’s Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel is GRANTED effective upon filing proof of service of the Court’s order upon Plaintiff.

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.