Ferruzzo

Ferruzzo v. Superior Court

Good Law
104 Cal. App. 3d 501·163 Cal. Rptr. 573·1980 Cal. App. LEXIS 1698
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaApril 11, 1980Civ. 21962California761 words

Opinion

Opinion

Gardner, J.

In this writ of mandate proceeding, petitioner is the attorney of record for C & D Enterprises, Inc. in respondent’s case numbers 288459, 289608, and 286975. There is no appearance by either respondent or real party in interest.

In the respondent superior court petitioner, upon noticed motion, moved in each case to be relieved as counsel of record for the corporation (real party in interest) and to be relieved as counsel in two of the cases for individuals apparently connected with the corporation. The grounds consisted of noncooperation and nonpayment of attorney fees.

In case number 288459 the court granted the withdrawal motion as to the two individuals but denied the motion as to the corporation. In 289608 the court granted the withdrawal motion as to the sole individual client but denied the motion as to the corporation. In 286975 there were no individuals as clients and the court denied the motion as to the corporation.

In each case the court denied the motion on the ground that the client was a corporation and the court was without authority to allow the withdrawal as attorney of record for the corporation because, in the court’s opinion, the only available…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.