Mayra Guerrero v. Prime Masonry Materials, et al.
Case No: 17CV03332
Hearing Date: Tue Apr 10, 2018 9:30

Nature of Proceedings: Motion to be Relieved as Counsel; Motion Compel Answers; Motion Compel Responses

Two Motions to Compel

Attorneys

NordstrandBlack PC by Matthew Morrison, Attorney for Plaintiff

George J. Hernandez, Attorney for Defendant

Rulings:

1. Plaintiff’s lawyers NordstrandBlack PC’s request to be relieved as counsel is GRANTED.

2. Defendants’ Motions to Compel are CONTINUED to May 29, 2018, at 9:30am in anticipation that Plaintiff will either (a) have a new lawyer in place who will appear and respond to the Motions on that date and time, or (b) will elect to go forward and represent herself.

3. In the event Plaintiff has not secured the assistance of a lawyer by that date and time, the Court orders Plaintiff, Mayra Guerrero, to appear in this courtroom on May 29, 2018, at 9:30 to advise the Court on the progress of obtaining a lawyer or tell the Court she will proceed by self-representation.

4. The Court will not, at this juncture, modify, vacate or extend the Case Management Conference date of July 31, 2018, or the Mandatory Settlement Conference date of August 31, 2018, or the Trial Date of September 18, 2018. Plaintiff must assume, until further order of this Court that those dates remain in place. However, the Court will very likely modify and extend those dates when a new lawyer comes into the case to accommodate the new lawyer or Plaintiff elects to proceed by self-representation. On the other hand, the Court is not likely to modify or extend those dates if (1) there is no new lawyer retained and (2) Plaintiff elects not to proceed as a self-represented litigant, except for good cause shown.

5. ALERT TO PLAINTIFF Mayra Guerrero. If no new lawyer is in place, or Plaintiff has not shown good cause why her case should not be dismissed because there has been no appearance by Plaintiff before or on the next CMC date of July 31, 2018, the Court may dismiss her case.

5. NordstrandBlack PC will give notice to Plaintiff and Defendants of this Order and will promptly file a Proof of Service.

Analysis:

Defendants filed two Motions to Compel on March 2, 2018, and set the hearing for April 3, 2018. There is no response in the file.

On March 13, 2018, counsel for Plaintiff filed a motion to be relieved as counsel and filed the required supporting declaration stating that counsel for plaintiff Mayra Guerrero has been unable to establish contact with Ms. Guerrero for several months; attempts to contact Ms. Guerrero by phone, e-mail, U.S. Mail, and in person at her last known address have been unsuccessful. The Motion was set for April 10, 2018.

The declaration acknowledges that there are significant “dates” set for the case:

April 3, 2018 – Response to Motions to Compel

July 31, 2018 – Case Management Conference.

August 31, 2018 – Mandatory Settlement Conference.

September 18, 2018 – Trial Call.

This Court concludes that it is necessary to decide the Motion to Withdraw as Counsel before deciding the issues related to the Motions to Compel.

Conclusions: The motion to withdraw as counsel should be granted under these circumstances. At the same time, the Plaintiff needs to be alerted of the consequences of this decision and that the Motion(s) to compel are still viable.