On 05/20/2009 CROSSROADS INTERCONTINENTAL LTD filed a Contract - Other Contract lawsuit against RICHARD BENICHOU. This case was filed in Los Angeles County Superior Courts, Stanley Mosk Courthouse located in Los Angeles, California. The Judges overseeing this case are GREGORY W. ALARCON and MATTHEW ST. GEORGE. The case status is Disposed - Judgment Entered.
Disposed - Judgment Entered
Los Angeles County Superior Courts
Stanley Mosk Courthouse
Los Angeles, California
GREGORY W. ALARCON
MATTHEW ST. GEORGE
CROSSROADS INTERNATIONAL LTD.
BENICHOU RICHARD DEFAULT
DOES 1 THROUGH 100
UNLIMITED RESOURCES GROUP INC. DEFAULT
HERZLICH & BLUM LLP
COHEN BARRY L. ESQ.
GRAFF BETH E. ESQ.
RUCKER FRED ESQ.
HERZLICH ALLAN EDWARD
1/10/2013: OPPOSITION TO MOTION FOR ORDER VACATING AND SETTING ASIDE DEFAULT ETC.; MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUIHORITIES IN SUPPORT
2/7/2013: NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION OPPOSING NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION FOR ASSIGNMENT ORDER FROM PLAINTIFF?S ATTORNEYS; ETC
6/13/2013: NOTICE DESIGNATING RECORD ON APPEAL (UNLIMITED CIVIL CASE)
9/3/2013: MEMO OF COSTS AFTER JUDGEMENT, ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF CREDIT AND DECLARATION OF ACCRUED INTEREST -
6/26/2015: APPLICATION AND ORDER FOR APPEARANCE AND EXAMINATION
7/1/2016: NOTICE OF RULING.
DocketProof of Service - Order Granting Attorney's Motion to be Relieved as Counsel; Filed by Allan Edward Herzlich (Attorney)Read MoreRead Less
DocketOrder Granting Attorney's Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel-Civil; Filed by Allan Edward Herzlich (Attorney)Read MoreRead Less
Docketat 08:30 AM in Department 36, Gregory W. Alarcon, Presiding; Hearing on Motion to be Relieved as Counsel - HeldRead MoreRead Less
DocketMinute Order ((Hearing on Motion to be Relieved as Counsel)); Filed by ClerkRead MoreRead Less
DocketOrder (granting mtn to be relieved); Filed by ClerkRead MoreRead Less
DocketMotion to Be Relieved as Counsel; Filed by Allan Edward Herzlich (Attorney)Read MoreRead Less
DocketDeclaration in Support of Attorney's Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel-Civil; Filed by Allan Edward Herzlich (Attorney)Read MoreRead Less
Docketat 08:30 AM in Department 36, Gregory W. Alarcon, Presiding; Hearing on Motion to be Relieved as Counsel - Not Held - Taken Off Calendar by PartyRead MoreRead Less
DocketNotice of Ruling; Filed by Plaintiff/PetitionerRead MoreRead Less
DocketNOTICE OF RULING.Read MoreRead Less
DocketPROOF OF SERVICE SUMMONSRead MoreRead Less
DocketNOTICE OF CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCERead MoreRead Less
DocketNotice; Filed by Crossroads International, LTD. (Legacy Party)Read MoreRead Less
DocketFirst Amended Complaint; Filed by Plaintiff/PetitionerRead MoreRead Less
DocketNotice of Case Management Conference; Filed by ClerkRead MoreRead Less
DocketNOTICE OF CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCERead MoreRead Less
DocketFIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR : 1. BREACH OF KNIT APPAREL AGREEMENT ; 2. ETC.Read MoreRead Less
DocketSUMMONSRead MoreRead Less
DocketCOMPLAINT FOR: 1. BREACH OF KNIT APPAREL AGREEMENT; ETC.Read MoreRead Less
DocketComplaint; Filed by nullRead MoreRead Less
Case Number: BC414160 Hearing Date: January 29, 2021 Dept: 36
Superior Court of California
County of Los Angeles
CROSSROADS INTERCONTINENTAL, LTD., a Mauritian company,
RICHARD BENICHOU, an individual; UNLIMITED RESOURCES GROUP, INC., a California corporation; and DOES 1-100, inclusive,
Case No.: BC414160
Hearing Date: 1/29/2021
[TENTATIVE] RULING RE: Motion to be Relieved as Counsel
Counsel Herzlich & Blum, LLP’s motion to be relieved as counsel for Plaintiff Crossroads Intercontinental, Ltd. is granted.
The court has discretion to allow an attorney to withdraw, and such a motion should be granted provided that there is no prejudice to the client and it does not disrupt the orderly process of justice. (See Ramirez v. Sturdevant (1994) 21 Cal. App. 4th 904, 915; People v. Prince (1968) 268 Cal. App. 2d 398.)
An application to be relieved as counsel must be made on Judicial Council Form MC-051 (Notice of Motion and Motion), MC-052 (Declaration), and MC-053 (Proposed Order). (Cal. Rules of Court, Rule 3.1362(a), (c), (e).) The requisite forms must be served “on the client and on all parties that have appeared in the case.” (Cal. Rules of Court, Rule 3.1362(d).)
Counsel Herzlich & Blum, LLP, seeks to be relieved as counsel for Plaintiff Crossroads Intercontinental, Ltd., on grounds of a “[d]ifference of opinion as to how best to proceed to enforce the Judgment.” A breakdown in the attorney-client relationship is grounds for allowing the attorney to withdraw. (Estate of Falco (1987) 188 Cal.App.3d 1004.)
Pursuant to California Rules of Court, Rule 3.1362(a), (c), and (e), Counsel has provided each application on Judicial Counsel forms MC-051, MC-052, and MC-053. Counsel has attested that the client has been served by mail with the mail address confirmed within the last 30 days pursuant to California Rules of Court, Rule 3.1362(d). The proof of service discloses mail was sent to the client in Bangalore, India on December 14, 2020, adding 20 calendar days to the 16 court day notice period, and notice is timely for the January 29, 2021 hearing. (CCP § 1005(b).)
This case resulted in a Judgment that was signed and filed on June 15, 2011. There are no further dates in this action save for the motion to be relieved as counsel, which date has been disclosed.
California courts require an attorney to, before terminating representation, take reasonable steps to avoid reasonably foreseeable prejudice to the rights of the client, such as giving the client sufficient notice to permit the client to retain other counsel. (Cal. Professional Conduct, Rule 1.16.) An attorney violates his or her ethical mandate by withdrawing at a critical point in litigation and thereby prejudicing the client’s case. (Ramirez v. Sturdevant (1994) 21 Cal.App.4th 904, 915.) In the case of a corporation, special rules apply for an attorney to withdraw. “[A] corporation cannot act in propria persona in a California state court.” (Thomas G. Ferruzzo, Inc. v. Superior Court (1980) 104 Cal.App.3d 501, 503.) An attorney may still withdraw, however, on proper grounds; the effect is that the corporation is without representation and without ability to practice self-representation, putting extreme pressure on the corporation to obtain new counsel for risk of forfeiture of its rights. (Id. at 503-04.)
In light that there are no further dates set in this action, and no opposition to the motion, there is no showing of prejudice to the client.
Based on the foregoing, the motion is granted.
Superior Court Judge
Get Deeper Insights on Court Cases