On 06/03/2019 ABU AL-RHMAN ALHAJRY filed a Personal Injury - Motor Vehicle lawsuit against NATHALY RIVAS. This case was filed in Los Angeles County Superior Courts, Spring Street Courthouse located in Los Angeles, California. The Judge overseeing this case is JAMES E. BLANCARTE. The case status is Disposed - Dismissed.
*******5309
06/03/2019
Disposed - Dismissed
Spring Street Courthouse
Los Angeles, California
JAMES E. BLANCARTE
ALHAJRY ABU AL-RHMAN
RIVAS MAXIMILIANO
RIVAS NATHALY
AYRAPETYAN EDWIN
TOPCHYAN ARUTYUN
2/3/2020: Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel - Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel
4/21/2020: Notice Re: Continuance of Hearing and Order - Notice Re: Continuance of Hearing and Order
7/28/2020: Proof of Service (not Summons and Complaint) - Proof of Service (not Summons and Complaint)
7/28/2020: Declaration in Support of Attorney's Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel-Civil - Declaration in Support of Attorney's Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel-Civil
7/29/2020: Minute Order - Minute Order (Hearing on Motion to be Relieved as Counsel)
8/10/2020: Notice of Ruling - Notice of Ruling
10/15/2020: Minute Order - Minute Order (Hearing on Motion to be Relieved as Counsel)
10/15/2020: Order Granting Attorney's Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel-Civil - Order Granting Attorney's Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel-Civil
10/21/2020: Proof of Service (not Summons and Complaint) - Proof of Service (not Summons and Complaint)
11/30/2020: Certificate of Mailing for - Certificate of Mailing for (Non-Jury Trial) of 11/30/2020
11/30/2020: Minute Order - Minute Order (Non-Jury Trial)
6/3/2019: Civil Case Cover Sheet - Civil Case Cover Sheet
6/3/2019: Complaint - Complaint
6/3/2019: Summons - Summons on Complaint
6/3/2019: First Amended Standing Order - First Amended Standing Order
6/3/2019: Notice of Case Assignment - Limited Civil Case - Notice of Case Assignment - Limited Civil Case
DocketOn the Complaint filed by Abu Al-Rhman Alhajry on 06/03/2019, entered Order for Dismissal without prejudice as to the entire action, pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure Section 581(b)(3)
DocketMinute Order (Non-Jury Trial)
DocketCertificate of Mailing for (Non-Jury Trial) of 11/30/2020; Filed by: Clerk
DocketNon-Jury Trial scheduled for 11/30/2020 at 08:30 AM in Spring Street Courthouse at Department 25 updated: Result Date to 11/30/2020; Result Type to Held
DocketOrder to Show Cause Re: Failure to File Proof of Service scheduled for 06/06/2022 at 10:30 AM in Spring Street Courthouse at Department 25 Not Held - Vacated by Court on 11/30/2020
DocketAddress for Arutyun Topchyan (Attorney) court order
DocketAddress for Edwin Ayrapetyan (Attorney) null
DocketProof of Service (not Summons and Complaint); Filed by: Abu Al-Rhman Alhajry (Plaintiff)
DocketOrder Granting Attorney's Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel-Civil; Signed and Filed by: Abu Al-Rhman Alhajry (Plaintiff)
DocketMinute Order (Hearing on Motion to be Relieved as Counsel)
DocketHearing on Motion to be Relieved as Counsel scheduled for 05/18/2020 at 10:30 AM in Stanley Mosk Courthouse at Department 94
DocketMotion to Be Relieved as Counsel; Filed by: Attorney; As to: Nathaly Rivas (Defendant); Maximiliano Rivas (Defendant)
DocketNon-Jury Trial scheduled for 11/30/2020 at 08:30 AM in Stanley Mosk Courthouse at Department 94
DocketOrder to Show Cause Re: Failure to File Proof of Service scheduled for 06/06/2022 at 08:30 AM in Stanley Mosk Courthouse at Department 94
DocketCase assigned to Hon. James E. Blancarte in Department 94 Stanley Mosk Courthouse
DocketComplaint; Filed by: Abu Al-Rhman Alhajry (Plaintiff); As to: Nathaly Rivas (Defendant); Maximiliano Rivas (Defendant)
DocketSummons on Complaint; Issued and Filed by: Abu Al-Rhman Alhajry (Plaintiff); As to: Nathaly Rivas (Defendant); Maximiliano Rivas (Defendant)
DocketCivil Case Cover Sheet; Filed by: Abu Al-Rhman Alhajry (Plaintiff); As to: Nathaly Rivas (Defendant); Maximiliano Rivas (Defendant)
DocketNotice of Case Assignment - Limited Civil Case; Filed by: Clerk
DocketFirst Amended Standing Order; Filed by: Clerk
Case Number: 19STLC05309 Hearing Date: October 15, 2020 Dept: 25
HEARING DATE: Thu., October 15, 2020 JUDGE /DEPT: Blancarte/25
CASE NAME: Alhajry v. Rivas, et al. COMPL. FILED: 06-03-19
CASE NUMBER: 19STLC05309 DISC. C/O: 10-31-20
NOTICE: OK MOTION C/O: 11-15-20
TRIAL DATE: 11-30-20
PROCEEDINGS: MOTION TO BE RELIEVED AS COUNSEL
MOVING PARTY: Plaintiff’s Counsel Arutyun Art Topchyan
RESP. PARTY: None
MOTION TO BE RELIEVED AS COUNSEL
(CCP § 284(2); CRC rule 3.1362)
TENTATIVE RULING:
Plaintiff’s Counsel Arutyun Art Topchyan’s Motion to be Relieved as Counsel is GRANTED and the Order will be signed at the hearing. “After the order is signed, a copy of the signed order must be served on the client and on all parties that have appeared in the case.” (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1362(e).) Plaintiff] has been filed with the court.” (Id.)
SERVICE:
[X] Proof of Service Timely Filed (CRC, rule 3.1300) OK
[X] Correct Address (CCP §§ 1013, 1013a) OK
[X] 16/21 Court Days Lapsed (CCP §§ 12c, 1005(b)) OK
OPPOSITION: None filed as of October 9, 2020 [ ] Late [X] None
REPLY: None filed as of October 9, 2020 [ ] Late [X] None
ANALYSIS:
Background
On June 3, 2019, Plaintiff Abu Al-Rhman Alhajry (“Plaintiff”) filed an action for motor vehicle negligence against Defendants Nathaly Rivas and Maximiliano Rivas (collectively, “Defendants”). No proof of service as to either Defendant has been filed yet.
On February 3, 2020, Plaintiff’s Counsel Arutyun Art Topchyan (“Counsel”) filed the instant Motion to be Relieved as Counsel (the “Motion”).
At the initial July 29, 2020 hearing, the Court found that the Motion did not include required form MC-052, the supporting declaration, form MC-053, the proposed order, or a proof of service demonstrating the Motion was properly served on Plaintiff. (7/29/20 Minute Order.) The Court notes that Plaintiff’s counsel filed forms MC-052 and MC-053 as well as a proof of service on July 28, 2020, only one day before the initial July 29, 2020 hearing, which is why these documents were not previously considered.
To date, no opposition has been filed.
Legal Standard
(B) The service address is the last known residence or business address of the client and the attorney has been unable to locate a more current address after making reasonable efforts to do so within 30 days before the filing of the motion to be relieved.
Discussion
In the declaration filed on July 28, 2020, Plaintiff’s Counsel explains he seeks to be relieved because he has lost contact with Plaintiff. (MC-052, ¶ 2.) Specifically, Counsel states that his office has been unable to contact Plaintiff for over a year, that Plaintiff has not provided an updated address or telephone number, and that mail sent has been returned. (Id.) Counsel further states that, although his office lost contact with Plaintiff, he filed this action to ensure that the statute of limitations was preserved for Plaintiff. (Id. at ¶ 7.) Counsel served this Motion at Plaintiff’s last known address, which Counsel was unable to confirm despite mailing this Motion with a return receipt requested and calling Plaintiff’s last known phone number. (Id. at ¶ 3.)
The Court is satisfied with Counsel’s reasons for seeking to be relived and finds that he has satisfied the requirements of California Rules of Court, rule 3.1362, subdivisions (a) and (c)-(e). Accordingly, the Motion is GRANTED.
Conclusion & Order
For the foregoing reasons, Plaintiff’s Counsel Arutyun Art Topchyan’s Motion to be Relieved as Counsel is GRANTED and the Order will be signed at the hearing. “After the order is signed, a copy of the signed order must be served on the client and on all parties that have appeared in the case.” (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1362(e).) Plaintiff] has been filed with the court.” (Id.)
Plaintiff’s Counsel is ordered to give notice.
Case Number: 19STLC05309 Hearing Date: July 29, 2020 Dept: 25
HEARING DATE: Wed., July 29, 2020 JUDGE /DEPT: Blancarte/25
CASE NAME: Alhajry v. Rivas, et al. COMPL. FILED: 06-03-19
CASE NUMBER: 19STLC05309 DISC. C/O: 10-31-20
NOTICE: NO MOTION C/O: 11-15-20
TRIAL DATE: 11-30-20
PROCEEDINGS: MOTION TO BE RELIEVED AS COUNSEL
MOVING PARTY: Plaintiff’s Counsel Arutyun Art Topchyan
RESP. PARTY: None
MOTION TO BE RELIEVED AS COUNSEL
(CCP § 284(2); CRC rule 3.1362)
TENTATIVE RULING:
Plaintiff’s Counsel Arutyun Art Topchyan’s Motion to be Relieved as Counsel is CONTINUED TO OCTOBER 15, 2020 at 10:30 a.m. in Department 25 at the SPRING STREET COURTHOUSE. At least 16 court days before the next scheduled hearing, Plaintiff’s Counsel must file and serve supplemental papers addressing the deficiencies identified herein. Failure to do so may result in the Motion being placed off calendar or denied.
SERVICE:
[ ] Proof of Service Timely Filed (CRC, rule 3.1300) NO
[ ] Correct Address (CCP §§ 1013, 1013a) NO
[ ] 16/21 Court Days Lapsed (CCP §§ 12c, 1005(b)) NO
OPPOSITION: None filed as of July 27, 2020 [ ] Late [X] None
REPLY: None filed as of July 27, 2020 [ ] Late [X] None
ANALYSIS:
Background
On June 3, 2019, Plaintiff Abu Al-Rhman Alhajry (“Plaintiff”) filed an action for motor vehicle negligence against Defendants Nathaly Rivas and Maximiliano Rivas (collectively, “Defendants”). No proof of service as to either Defendant has been filed yet.
On February 3, 2020, Plaintiff’s Counsel Arutyun Art Topchyan (“Counsel”) filed the instant Motion to be Relieved as Counsel (the “Motion”). To date, no opposition has been filed.
Legal Standard
(B) The service address is the last known residence or business address of the client and the attorney has been unable to locate a more current address after making reasonable efforts to do so within 30 days before the filing of the motion to be relieved.
Discussion
The Court finds that Plaintiff’s Counsel’s Motion is incomplete. Specifically, Plaintiff’s Counsel did not file the required Declaration on Judicial Form MC-052 nor the Proposed Order on Form MC-052 as required by California Rules of Court, rule 3.1362 subdivisions (a), (c), (e). In addition, Plaintiff’s Counsel did not file a proof of service demonstrating this Motion was served on Plaintiff. Failure to give notice of a motion is not only a violation of the statutory requirements but of due process. (Code Civ. Proc., § 1005; Jones v. Otero (1984) 156 Cal.App.3d 754, 757.) The Court cannot rule on the Motion until Plaintiff has been given notice in accordance with the statutory requirements.
Conclusion & Order
For the foregoing reasons, Plaintiff’s Counsel Arutyun Art Topchyan’s Motion to be Relieved as Counsel is CONTINUED TO OCTOBER 15, 2020 at 10:30 a.m. in Department 25 at the SPRING STREET COURTHOUSE. At least 16 court days before the next scheduled hearing, Plaintiff’s Counsel must file and serve supplemental papers addressing the deficiencies identified herein. Failure to do so may result in the Motion being placed off calendar or denied.
Moving party is ordered to give notice.