Fuentes vs. Tran

advertising for the vehicle, use of your vehicle, the performance of the vehicle, any service relating to the vehicle, the vehicle warranty, representations in the warranty, or the duties contemplated under the warranty, including without limitation claims related to false or misleading advertising, unfair competition, breach of contract or warranty, the failure to conform a vehicle to warranty, failure to repurchase or replace your vehicle, or claims for a refund or partial refund of your vehicle's purchase price (excluding personal injury claims), but excluding claims brought under the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act, shall be resolved by binding arbitration at either your or our election, even if the claim is initially filed in a court of law.” (Decl. of Ameripour, Ex. 2.)

Therefore, the agreement to arbitrate contained in the Warranty is broad enough to encompass Plaintiff’s claims for breach of implied warranty, breach of express warranty, and violation of the Song Beverly Consumer Warranty Act.

Plaintiff did not oppose, and, therefore, failed to demonstrate that any of his claims fall outside of the Arbitration Agreement. Plaintiff also failed to present any challenges to the Arbitration Agreement and failed to argue why it should not be enforceable.

Accordingly, the Motion to Compel Arbitration is granted, and the action is stayed pending the completion of arbitration. (Code Civ. Proc. § 1281.4.)

An ADR Review Hearing is set for 9:00 a.m. on November 3, 2026, in Department N16.

Defendant shall give notice of this ruling.

7 Fuentes vs. Tran TENTATIVE RULING:

For the reasons set forth below, the motion by Justin Farahi of Farahi Law Firm, APC, to be relieved as counsel for Plaintiff Jimmy Anthony Fuentes is GRANTED.

An attorney may withdraw even without cause as long as “withdrawal can be accomplished without undue prejudice to the client’s interests.” (Ramirez v. Sturdevant (1994) 21 Cal.App.4th 904, 915.) It is within the court’s discretion as to whether to deny an attorney’s request to withdraw because such withdrawal would cause injustice or undue delay in the proceeding; however, such discretion is to be exercised reasonably. (See Mandell v. Sup. Ct (1977) 67 Cal.App.3d 1, 4.)

A notice of motion and motion to be relieved as counsel under CCP section 284(2) shall be directed to the client and shall be made on the Notice of Motion and Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel-Civil form (MC-051). (Cal. R. Ct. 3.1362(a).) No memorandum is required for the motion. (Cal. R. Ct. 3.l362(b)). The motion shall be accompanied by a declaration stating in general terms, without compromising the confidentiality of the attorney-client relationship, why counsel is making a motion instead of filing a consent. (Cal.

R. Ct. 3.1362(c)). If the motion is served by mail, it shall be accompanied by a declaration stating facts showing either that (1) the service address is the current residence or business address of the client or (2) the service address is the last known residence or business address of the client and the attorney has been unable to locate a more current address after making reasonable efforts to do so within 30 days prior to filing the motion. (Cal. R. Ct. 3.1362(d)).

The motion may be brought on various grounds, some of which include the client’s failure to pay attorney fees (People v. Prince (1968) 268 Cal.App.2d 398, 406), the client’s insistence on an action that is not justified under existing law or by good faith argument (Estate of Falco v. Decker (1987) 188 Cal.App.3d 1004, 1015), and a conflict of interest between counsel and the client (Aceves v. Superior Court (1996) 51 Cal.App.4th 584, 592).

Here, the motion is procedurally and substantively sufficient. Counsel has provided the reason for withdrawal—a breakdown in the attorney- client relationship. Counsel has properly served the client. The client has not filed an opposition establishing prejudice. As this case is in its early stages, with trial not yet set, the court does not find any prejudice in granting the motion.

For this reason, the motion is granted. The order relieving counsel shall become effective upon the filing of a proof of service showing that the signed order has been served on the client.

Moving counsel to give notice.

8 Kimes vs. Rich TENTATIVE RULING:

Terminating Sanctions

For the reasons set forth below, Plaintiff Conrad Phillip Kimes’ motion for terminating sanctions is DENIED.