HELLER CASTILLO VS CITY OF LOS ANGELES ET AL

Motion to be Relieved as Counsel

Having considered the moving papers, the Court rules as follows. No opposing papers have been filed.

BACKGROUND

On October 19, 2016, Plaintiff Heller Castillo (collectively, “Plaintiff”) filed a complaint against Defendants City of Los Angeles, Los Angeles Police Department, and Does 1-50. The complaint alleges that Plaintiff suffered personal injuries and emotional distress as a result of being bitten by a Los Angeles Police Department K-9 unit on April 27, 2016. 

On February 5, 2020, John H. Oh, counsel for Plaintiff (“Counsel”), filed the motion to be relieved as counsel pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure section 284, subdivision (2). 

Trial is set for May 15, 2020.

PARTY’S REQUEST

Counsel seeks to be relieved as counsel for Plaintiff on the grounds that Plaintiff has been uncooperative and has refused attorney’s counsel, and is preventing Counsel from effectively providing legal services. Plaintiff has refused to further cooperate with Counsel in preparing for trial and in providing trial costs as expressed in the parties’ original agreement. Due to Plaintiff’s uncooperative behavior, Counsel believes he can no longer effectively represent Plaintiff.

Furthermore, Counsel declares that there has been an irreconcilable breakdown of the relationship between Plaintiff and Counsel which makes further representation impossible. Plaintiff has refused to listen to any settlement discussions, including the defendant's most recent 998 offer, refused to contribute to trial costs, and refused to cooperate in trial preparation, including testimony and presentation of evidence. LEGAL STANDARD

California Rule of Court rule 3.1362 (Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel) requires (1) notice of motion and motion to be 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 and declaration 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)).

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.

DISCUSSION

Counsel has completed and filed forms MC-051, MC-052, and MC-053. Counsel declares that he served Plaintiff by mail at his last known address, confirmed within the past 30 days by conversation. Counsel attaches proof of service indicating that all forms were served on Plaintiff and Defendants by mail and electronic mail. 

The Court finds that the motion is proper. There is no evidence showing Plaintiff would be prejudiced or the orderly process of justice would be disrupted in granting this motion. Trial is set for May 15, 2020. Plaintiff has enough time to retain substitute counsel and for that counsel to prepare for trial.

CONCLUSION

The motion is GRANTED.

Counsel is relieved as counsel for Plaintiff effective upon the filing of the proof of service of Order Granting Attorney’s Motion to be Relieved as Counsel–Civil form MC–053.

Counsel is ordered to give notice of this ruling.