On 07/25/2017 DALE SEIDEN filed a Contract - Other Contract lawsuit against JERRY BERNSTEIN, . This case was filed in Los Angeles County Superior Courts, Stanley Mosk Courthouse located in Los Angeles, California. The Judges overseeing this case are MITCHELL L. BECKLOFF and CRAIG D. KARLAN. The case status is Pending - Other Pending.
****7857
07/25/2017
Pending - Other Pending
Los Angeles County Superior Courts
Stanley Mosk Courthouse
Los Angeles, California
MITCHELL L. BECKLOFF
CRAIG D. KARLAN
SEIDEN DALE
SUPERIOR EQUIPMENT SOLUTION
BERNSTEIN JEFFERY
BERNSTEIN STEPHEN
STEPHEN BERNSTEIN
KINSELLA DALE F.
MELIUS AMBER HOLLEY
BENDER JORDAN A.
EISNER JAFFE GORRY CHAPMAN & ROSS
BENDER JORDAN ANDREW
TURKEN JAMES H.
OSBORN BLAKE LOUIS
9/29/2017: Unknown
11/6/2017: Case Management Statement
2/2/2018: Unknown
5/15/2018: Brief
6/27/2018: Minute Order
8/1/2018: Minute Order
9/4/2018: Opposition
12/18/2018: Ex Parte Application
12/28/2018: Declaration
2/25/2019: Minute Order
3/7/2019: Unknown
3/25/2019: Request for Judicial Notice
4/3/2019: Request for Judicial Notice
4/3/2019: Objection
4/12/2019: Motion in Limine
4/12/2019: Motion in Limine
4/12/2019: Motion in Limine
5/20/2019: Minute Order
Notice of Change of Address or Other Contact Information; Filed by JEFFERY BERNSTEIN (Defendant)
at 09:30 AM in Department M; Jury Trial - Not Held - Continued - Court's Motion
at 09:30 AM in Department M; Jury Trial - Not Held - Clerical Error
at 09:18 AM in Department M; Court Order
Certificate of Mailing for (Minute Order (Court Order) of 05/20/2019); Filed by Clerk
Minute Order ( (Court Order)); Filed by Clerk
at 09:30 AM in Department M; Jury Trial - Not Held - Continued - Party's Motion
at 2:00 PM in Department M; Final Status Conference - Held
Stipulation and Order to use Certified Shorthand Reporter; Filed by DALE SEIDEN (Plaintiff)
Minute Order ( (Final Status Conference)); Filed by Clerk
Answer to Complaint Filed; Filed by Attorney for Defendant
Proof-Service/Summons; Filed by Attorney for Plaintiff
Proof-Service/Summons; Filed by DALE SEIDEN (Plaintiff)
Proof-Service/Summons; Filed by Attorney for Plaintiff
Proof-Service/Summons; Filed by DALE SEIDEN (Plaintiff)
Complaint; Filed by DALE SEIDEN (Plaintiff)
Civil Case Cover Sheet
Complaint Filed
Summons Filed; Filed by Attorney for Plaintiff
Summons; Filed by Plaintiff
Case Number: SC127857 Hearing Date: March 18, 2020 Dept: M
Counsel for Defendants Jeffrey Bernstein and Superior Equipment Solutions seek to be relieved as counsel. There is no opposition.
Legal Standard
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). (CRC Rule 3.1362(a), (c), (e).) “The [proposed] order must specify all hearing dates scheduled in the action or proceeding, including the date of trial, if known. If no hearing date is presently scheduled, the court may set one and specify the date in the order. After the order is signed, a copy of the signed order must be served on the client and on all parties that have appeared in the case.” (CRC Rule 3.1362(e) (emphasis added).)
The requisite forms must be served “on the client and on all parties that have appeared in the case.” (CRC Rule 3.1362(d).) The required forms may be served “by personal service, electronic service, or mail.” (CRC Rule 3.1362(d).) In addition, “[i]f the notice is served on the client by electronic service under Code of Civil Procedure section 1010.6 and rule 2.251, it must be accompanied by a declaration stating that the electronic service address is the client's current electronic service address.” (CRC Rule 3.1362(d)(2).) Furthermore, as used in CRC Rule 3.162, “‘current’ means that the address was confirmed within 30 days before the filing of the motion to be relieved. Merely demonstrating that the notice was sent to the client's last known address and was not returned or no electronic delivery failure message was received is not, by itself, sufficient to demonstrate that the address is current. . . .’” (CRC Rule 3.1362(d).)
ANALYSIS
Attorneys James H. Turken, Blake L. Osborn, Jordan A. Bender (“Counsel”) counsel for defendants Jeffrey Bernstein and Superior Equipment Solutions seeks to be relieved as counsel. Here, Counsel have filed Judicial Council Form MC-051 (Notice of Motion and Motion), MC-052 (Declaration), and MC-053 (Proposed Order). Counsel notes that there has been an irreparable breakdown in the attorney-client relationship due to their clients conduct rendering it unreasonably difficult for them to carry out the representation effectively. (Turken Decl., MC-052, item 2.l.) Counsel for Plaintiff seeks to withdraw due to this breakdown of the attorney-client relationship. (Id.) This motion is unopposed. The Court finds good cause to relieve counsel. For these reasons, the motion is GRANTED.