CALCULATED RISK ANALYTICS LLC DBA EXCELERATE CAPITAL, A CALIFORNIA LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY VS ANASTASIIA VERESHCHAK, ET AL.

Tentative Rulings

Case Number: *******0868 Hearing Date: January 19, 2023 Dept: 3

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - NORTHEAST DISTRICT

I. BACKGROUND

On October 15, 2020, plaintiff Calculated Risk Analytics LLC dba Excelerate Capital (“Plaintiff”) brought this action against defendants Anastasia Vereshchak, Hasmik Kadimyan, Edwin Barkhordarian, Golie Ghoreishi, Ara Haritunian, Tamara Dadyan, and Boulevard Escrow Services, Inc., asserting causes of action for fraud, negligence, and breach of fiduciary duty. On July 7, 2021, Avitis Avetikian (“Avetikian”) was added as a defendant.

In July of 2022 the parties reached a settlement agreement to refinance the loan in dispute. Pursuant to the terms of the settlement agreement, the loan at issue was to be refinanced no later than September 15, 2022, and the action dismissed thereafter. However, Defendant Avetikian, who was a party to the settlement agreement, requested an extension of the loan refinance date to October 14, 2022. An amendment to the settlement agreement was sent to the parties. Unfortunately, Avetikian has since passed away.

On November 21, 2022, Zachary Schorr and Stephanie Goldstein (“Counsel”) filed this motion to be relieved as counsel for Avetikian. The motion is unopposed.

II. LEGAL STANDARD

The court may order that an attorney be changed or substituted at any time before or after judgment or final determination upon request by either client or attorney and after notice from one to the other. (Code of Civ. Proc., 284(b).) An attorney is permitted to withdraw where conflicts between the attorney and client make it unreasonable to continue the representation. (See Cal. Rules of Prof. Conduct 3-700(C)(1).) “The determination whether to grant or deny a motion to withdraw as counsel lies within the sound discretion of the trial court.” (Manfredi & Levine v. Superior Court (1998) 66 Cal.App.4th 1128, 1133.)

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)).

III. DISCUSSION

Here, Counsel filed notice and a motion to be relieved as counsel on Form MC-051. Counsel also filed a declaration in support of their motion on Form MC-052. Proof of service indicates that both forms were properly served on all parties who have appeared in this action. In their declaration, Counsel states that they recently learned Mr. Avetikian passed away, that they do not have any contact information for the representative of his estate, and that no one has reached out to retain their services on behalf of the estate. Counsel further states there is an outstanding balance that remains unpaid.

Counsel provides valid reason for withdrawing their representation. Mr. Avetikian has passed away and will not be prejudiced. However, Counsel has not filed a proposed order on Form MC-053 as required by California Rule of Court rule 3.1362.

Accordingly, Counsel’s motion to be relieved as counsel is DENIED without prejudice. Counsel must serve Form MC-053 on all parties and file it with the Court. In preparing that order, counsel should be mindful of dates set at the upcoming Case Management and Trial Setting Conference in this matter. The date currently on the docket for those is January 24, 2023, but that date will be modified and counsel should check the docket of this case for the new date.

IV. CONCLUSION

Zachary Schorr and Stephanie Goldstein’s motion to be relieved as counsel for Defendant Avitis Avetikian is DENIED without prejudice.

Moving party to give notice.

Parties who intend to submit on this tentative must send an email to the Court at alhdept3@lacourt.org indicating intention to submit on the tentative as directed by the instructions provided on the court 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.

Case Number: *******0868    Hearing Date: March 26, 2021    Dept: D