17-CIV-05088 JOSEPH MIZRACHI, ET AL. VS. SEYMOUR HOLTZMAN, ET AL.

JOSEPH MIZRACHI SEYMOUR HOLTZMAN
ANDREW D. CASTRICONE BRIAN T. HAFTER

DEFENDANT SEYMOUR HOLTZMAN’S APPLICATION FOR PRO HAC VICE ADMISSION OF RICHARD HUFFSMITH TENTATIVE RULING:

Defendant Seymour Holtzman’s application for pro hac vice admission of Richard Huffsmith is GRANTED.

Plaintiffs’ opposition asserts that defense counsel’s pro hac vice admission to defend a deposition in New York “will mislead the trier of fact and prejudice Plaintiffs.” Plaintiffs, however, do not clearly explain why counsel’s admission will have this effect. Further, the comments to RPC 5210, as well as the decision in Lyle v. Superior Court, 122 Cal. App. 3d 470, 482–83, 175 Cal. Rptr. 918, 926–27 (Ct. App. 1981), upon which Plaintiffs rely, indicate that the rule is concerned with the appearance of impropriety when an attorney acts as both an advocate and a witness before a jury. That concern is not present here. Further, there appears to be no reason Mr. Huffsmith’s role as Defendants’ counsel cannot be adequately addressed through cross-examination at trial, if necessary. Plaintiffs have not demonstrated, at this time, that Mr. Huffsmith’s appearance in this proceeding will result in prejudice.

If the tentative ruling is uncontested, it shall become the order of the Court. Thereafter, counsel for Defendant Holtzman shall prepare a written order consistent with the Court’s ruling for the Court’s signature, pursuant to California Rules of Court, Rule 3.1312, and provide written notice of the ruling to all parties who have appeared in the action, as required by law and the California Rules of Court.