CROSSROADS INTERCONTINENTAL LTD VS RICHARD BENICHOU ET AL

Tentative Rulings

Case Number: BC414160    Hearing Date: January 29, 2021    Dept: 36

Superior Court of California

County of Los Angeles

Department 36

Counsel Herzlich & Blum, LLP’s motion to be relieved as counsel for Plaintiff Crossroads Intercontinental, Ltd. is granted.

Relevant Law

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).)

Discussion

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.

Dated: ____________________________

Gregory Alarcon

Superior Court Judge