Judge: Lee W. Tsao, Case: 22NWCV01581, Date: 2023-04-26 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 22NWCV01581    Hearing Date: April 3, 2024    Dept: C

JULIO ZAYAS v. CITY OF LOS ANGELES

CASE NO.:  22NWCV01581

HEARING:  4/3/24 @ 9:30 A.M.

#2

TENTATIVE RULING

Plaintiff counsel, Ryan J. Daneshrad and Shantel Yaghoobian’s motion to be relieved as counsel for Julio Zayas is DENIED. 

Moving Party to give NOTICE.

The motion is unopposed as of April 3, 2024.

Plaintiff’s counsel, Ryan J. Daneshrad and Shantel Yaghoobian, move to be relieved as counsel for Julio Zayas.

Good cause exists to grant the motion based on any of the grounds under Rules of Professional Conduct Rule 3-700(C). Rule 3-700(c) provides that an attorney may withdraw based on any of the following: (1) The client (a) insists upon presenting a claim or defense that is not warranted under existing law and cannot be supported by good faith argument for an extension, modification, or reversal of existing law, or (b) seeks to pursue an illegal course of conduct, or (c) insists that the member pursue a course of conduct that is illegal or that is prohibited under these rules or the State Bar Act, or (d) by other conduct renders it unreasonably difficult for the member to carry out the employment effectively, or (e) insists, in a matter not pending before a tribunal, that the member engage in conduct that is contrary to the judgment and advice of the member but not prohibited under these rules or the State Bar Act, or (f) breaches an agreement or obligation to the member as to expenses or fees. (2) The continued employment is likely to result in a violation of these rules or of the State Bar Act; or (3) the inability to work with co-counsel indicates that the best interests of the client likely will be served by withdrawal; or (4) The member's mental or physical condition renders it difficult for the member to carry out the employment effectively; or (5) The client knowingly and freely assents to termination of the employment; or (6) The member believes in good faith, in a proceeding pending before a tribunal, that the tribunal will find the existence of other good cause for withdrawal.

The attorney declaration demonstrates good cause for withdrawal based on a breakdown in the attorney-client relationship.  The client was served by mail at his last known address, which was confirmed to be current within the past 30 days. However, the proof of service does not indicate that the proposed order was served. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.162(d).)

Thus, the motion is DENIED.