What obligations does a lawyer have when he moves to a new firm or his firm is dissolved?

Useful Rulings on Dissolving Firm and Moving to New Firm

Recent Rulings on Dissolving Firm and Moving to New Firm

CESAR ROMERO ET AL VS FIRST AMERICAN TITLE COMPANY ET AL

Marcus (1975) 51 Cal.App.3d 590, 599; see California Rules of Professional Conduct Rule 3-700(D)(1) (“‘Client papers and property’ includes correspondence, pleadings, deposition transcripts, exhibits, physical evidence, expert’s reports, and other items reasonably necessary to the client’s representation, whether the client has paid for them or not”).)

  • Hearing

    Jul 01, 2020

ARACELI RIOS ET AL VS PABLO FLORES ET AL

Conduct, rule 3-700(A)(2); Vann, supra, 54 Cal.App.3d at 197). Where the procedures are properly followed, withdrawal is permitted in the appropriate circumstances.

  • Hearing

    Feb 06, 2020

CESAR ROMERO ET AL VS FIRST AMERICAN TITLE COMPANY ET AL

Marcus (1975) 51 Cal.App.3d 590, 599; see California Rules of Professional Conduct Rule 3-700(D)(1) (“‘Client papers and property’ includes correspondence, pleadings, deposition transcripts, exhibits, physical evidence, expert’s reports, and other items reasonably necessary to the client’s representation, whether the client has paid for them or not”).)

  • Hearing

    Jan 31, 2020

TIM BAKER ET AL VS WILLIAM HOBBS ET AL

Conduct, rule 3-700(A)(2); Vann, supra, 54 Cal.App.3d at 197). Where the procedures are properly followed, withdrawal is permitted in the appropriate circumstances.

  • Hearing

    Jan 21, 2020

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    other

DONENUCI D'CARPIO VS SELDAT, INC., ET AL.

Conduct, rule 3-700(A)(2); Vann, supra, 54 Cal.App.3d at 197). Where the procedures are properly followed, withdrawal is permitted in the appropriate circumstances.

  • Hearing

    Dec 24, 2019

  • Type

    Employment

  • Sub Type

    Other Employment

DONENUCI D'CARPIO VS SELDAT, INC., ET AL.

Conduct, rule 3-700(A)(2); Vann, supra, 54 Cal.App.3d at 197). Where the procedures are properly followed, withdrawal is permitted in the appropriate circumstances.

  • Hearing

    Dec 23, 2019

  • Type

    Employment

  • Sub Type

    Other Employment

EMANUEL BROWN VS CITY OF LOS ANGELES ET AL

Conduct, rule 3-700(A)(2); Vann, supra, 54 Cal.App.3d at 197). Where the procedures are properly followed, withdrawal is permitted in the appropriate circumstances.

  • Hearing

    Dec 09, 2019

  • Type

    Employment

  • Sub Type

    Other Employment

JUSTINE MAJOR VS HOMER WILLIAM GROENING

Pursuant to California Rules of Professional Conduct, rule 3-700(A)(2), “[a] member shall not withdraw from employment until the member has taken reasonable steps to avoid reasonably foreseeable prejudice to the rights of the client, including giving due notice to the client, allowing time for employment of other counsel, complying with rule 3-700(D), and complying with applicable laws and rules.”

  • Hearing

    Oct 30, 2019

EVAN ISRAEL BRENNER VS MIKA JAYMES INC ET AL

Conduct, rule 3-700(A)(2); Vann, supra, 54 Cal.App.3d at 197). Where the procedures are properly followed, withdrawal is permitted in the appropriate circumstances.

  • Hearing

    Oct 30, 2019

FRANKIE ORTIZ VS JOSE LUIS MARTINEZ

Conduct, rule 3-700(A)(2).) The motion should be denied if it will cause undue delay in the proceeding or cause injustice. (Mandell v. Sup. Ct. (1977) 67 Cal.App.3d 1, 4.) The determination whether to grant or deny an attorney’s motion to withdraw as counsel of record lies within the sound discretion of the trial court, having in mind whether such withdrawal might work an injustice in the handling of the case. (Lempert v. Sup. Ct. (2003) 112 Cal.App.4th 1161, 1173.)

  • Hearing

    Sep 24, 2019

MARCIAL A. WILLIAMS VS ARBOR GROVE SENIOR APARTMENTS, ET AL

Conduct, rule 3-700(A)(2).) The motion should be denied if it will cause undue delay in the proceeding or cause injustice. (Mandell v. Sup. Ct. (1977) 67 Cal.App.3d 1, 4.) The determination whether to grant or deny an attorney’s motion to withdraw as counsel of record lies within the sound discretion of the trial court, having in mind whether such withdrawal might work an injustice in the handling of the case. (Lempert v. Sup. Ct. (2003) 112 Cal.App.4th 1161, 1173.)

  • Hearing

    Sep 05, 2019

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    other

REVOLT ELECTRIC INC. VS ADRIAN COVA, ET AL

Conduct, rule 3-700(A)(2).) The motion should be denied if it will cause undue delay in the proceeding or cause injustice. (Mandell v. Sup. Ct. (1977) 67 Cal.App.3d 1, 4.) The determination whether to grant or deny an attorney’s motion to withdraw as counsel of record lies within the sound discretion of the trial court, having in mind whether such withdrawal might work an injustice in the handling of the case. (Lempert v. Sup. Ct. (2003) 112 Cal.App.4th 1161, 1173.)

  • Hearing

    Aug 15, 2019

  • Type

    Business

  • Sub Type

    Intellectual Property

WS INVESTMENTS PROPERTY LLC VS IMELDA BALANAY ET AL

Conduct, rule 3-700(A)(2); Vann, supra 54 Cal.App.3d at 197). Where the procedures are properly followed, withdrawal is permitted in the appropriate circumstances.

  • Hearing

    Jul 23, 2019

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    other

FERNANDO OCTAVIO CATALAN VS ALL SERVICE DISPOSAL INC ET AL

Conduct, rule 3-700(A)(2); Vann, supra, 54 Cal.App.3d at 197). Where the procedures are properly followed, withdrawal is permitted in the appropriate circumstances.

  • Hearing

    Jul 12, 2019

  • Type

    Employment

  • Sub Type

    Wrongful Term

CLINT A CARMANY VS HYUNDAI MOTOR AMERICA

Conduct, rule 3-700(A)(2); Vann, supra 54 Cal.App.3d at 197). Where the procedures are properly followed, withdrawal is permitted in the appropriate circumstances.

  • Hearing

    Jul 09, 2019

  • Type

    Contract

  • Sub Type

    Breach

ZERO ENERGY VS GEORGE ARREDONDO

Conduct, rule 3-700(A)(2); Vann, supra 54 Cal.App.3d at 197). Where the procedures are properly followed, withdrawal is permitted in the appropriate circumstances.

  • Hearing

    Jul 02, 2019

ZERO ENERGY VS GEORGE ARREDONDO

Conduct, rule 3-700(A)(2); Vann, supra 54 Cal.App.3d at 197). Where the procedures are properly followed, withdrawal is permitted in the appropriate circumstances.

  • Hearing

    Jun 25, 2019

ZERO ENERGY VS GEORGE ARREDONDO

Conduct, rule 3-700(A)(2); Vann, supra 54 Cal.App.3d at 197). Where the procedures are properly followed, withdrawal is permitted in the appropriate circumstances.

  • Hearing

    Jun 24, 2019

NANCY TAN VS RAMEZ SULIAMEN ET AL

Conduct, rule 3-700(A)(2); Vann, supra, 54 Cal.App.3d at p. 197). Where the procedures are properly followed, withdrawal is permitted in the appropriate circumstances.

  • Hearing

    May 31, 2019

SHERMAN V. HANSON

(Rules of Professional Conduct, rule 3- 700(A)(2); Vann v. Shilleh (1975) 54 Cal.App.3d 192, 197, 126 Cal.Rptr. 401.) We are, however, aware of no authority preventing an attorney from withdrawing from a case when withdrawal can be accomplished without undue prejudice to the client's interests. Rather, in situations such as the present, the disincentive for withdrawing is the potential loss of any attorney fees. (See Estate of Falco (1987) 188 Cal.App.3d 1004, 233 Cal.Rptr. 807 and Hensel v.

  • Hearing

    May 30, 2019

NANCY TAN VS RAMEZ SULIAMEN ET AL

Conduct, rule 3-700(A)(2); Vann, supra, 54 Cal.App.3d at 197). Where the procedures are properly followed, withdrawal is permitted in the appropriate circumstances.

  • Hearing

    May 13, 2019

STANDARD-SOUTHERN CORPORATION ET AL VS PREMIUM FISH INC

Conduct, rule 3-700(A)(2); Vann, supra, 54 Cal.App.3d at 197). Where the procedures are properly followed, withdrawal is permitted in the appropriate circumstances.

  • Hearing

    May 07, 2019

  • Type

    Contract

  • Sub Type

    Breach

SARA LOKSEN VS CEDARS SINAI MEDICAL CENTER ET AL

An attorney “shall not withdraw from employment until the member has taken reasonable steps to avoid reasonably foreseeable prejudice to the rights of the client, including giving due notice to the client, allowing time for employment of other counsel, complying with rule 3-700(D), and complying with applicable laws and rules.” (Cal. Rules of Prof. Conduct, rule 3-700(A)(2).)

  • Hearing

    Feb 06, 2019

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Medical Malpractice

HERUN TRADING USA CORPORATION VS KUO CHOU ET AL

Conduct, rule 3-700(A)(2); Vann, supra 54 Cal.App.3d at 197). Where the procedures are properly followed, withdrawal is permitted in the appropriate circumstances.

  • Hearing

    Jan 11, 2019

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Fraud

BILLY CHARLES DELOACH SR ET AL VS TORRANCE MEMORIAL MEDICAL

Conduct, rule 3-700(A)(2); Vann, supra 54 Cal.App.3d at 197). Where the procedures are properly followed, withdrawal is permitted in the appropriate circumstances.

  • Hearing

    Jan 07, 2019

1 2 3     last » 

For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.

Please wait a moment while we gather your results.