CLIFFORD KATAB VS CRAIG KAPLAN, ET AL.

Tentative Rulings

Case Number: *******8803 Hearing Date: September 14, 2021 Dept: 31

APPLICATION TO BE ADMITTED PRO HAC VICE IS GRANTED.Background

On August 4, 2021, Plaintiff Clifford Katab, filed the instant action against Defendants Performance Team LLC, Craig Kaplan. and Does 1 through 20. The Complaint asserts causes of action for:

1. Violation of Labor Code—Failure to Pay Earned Bonuses;

2. Violation of Labor Code—Failure to Pay Accrued Vacation;

3. Breach of Contract—Employment Agreement;

4. Breach of Contract—Retention Agreement;

5. Money Had and Received; and

6. Declaratory and Injunctive Relief.

Plaintiff Clifford Katab (hereinafter “Plaintiff”) now moves for Counsel Connie N. Bertram to be admitted to this court pro hac vice.

Legal Standard on Motion to be Admitted Pro Hac Vice

California Rules of Court Rule 9.40 provides that an attorney in good standing in another jurisdiction may apply to appear pro hac vice in this State by way of written application upon notice by mail to all interested parties, as well as service on the State Bar in San Francisco with payment of a $50.00 fee, so long as that attorney is not a resident of California, does not work in California, and does not perform regular or substantial business, professional, or other activities in the State. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 9.40.)

The written application must provide the following information: (1) applicant attorney’s residence and office addresses; (2) the courts to which the applicant attorney has been admitted and dates of admission; (3) representation that the attorney applicant is a member in good standing in the courts of admission and is not currently suspended or disbarred in any court; (4) the title of each court and action in which the applicant attorney has appeared pro hac vice in this State in the preceding two years, if any; and (5) the name, address, and telephone number of the active California State Bar member who is counsel of record in the local action. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 9.40(d).)

Discussion

A. Procedural Compliance

There is nothing before the Court to indicate the application should not be granted. Based on the application and the attached declaration, Counsel Connie N. Bertram is not employed or residing within California (Bertram Decl. ¶¶ 1, 3); the attorney has not been admitted to another court within the past two years (Bertram Decl. ¶ 9); the applications contain the necessary addresses (Bertram Decl. ¶¶ 1, 3); the application has the proper admission information for other courts where the attorney is admitted (Bertram Decl. ¶ 4); and the attorney is in good standing (Bertram Decl. ¶¶ 5-6). (See Cal. Rules of Ct. rule 9.40.) The fee to the State Bar was also paid. (See McCortney Decl. ¶ 5, Exh. A.) Counsel Bertram is to be associated with local counsel, Sheppard, Mullin, Richter & Hampton, LLP. (Bertram Decl. ¶ 7.)

Accordingly, the Court grants Plaintiff’s motion for Counsel Bertram to be admitted pro hac vice.

Conclusion

The Court GRANTS Plaintiff’s motion and application for admission of Connie N. Bertram pro hac vice.

Plaintiff is to give notice.

The parties are strongly encouraged to attend all scheduled hearings virtually or by audio. Effective July 20, 2020, all matters will be scheduled virtually and/or with audio through the Court’s LACourtConnect technology. The parties are strongly encouraged to use LACourtConnect for all their matters. All masking protocols will be observed at the Courthouse and in the courtrooms.