DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
19-01087702·orange·Civil·Civil
Hearing about 2 months agoCONTINUED

Hillsboro Brown Capital, LLC vs. Taft

Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel of Record

Hearing date
Jul 7, 2026
Department
C25
Prevailing
N/A
Next hearing
Aug 4, 2026

Motion type

Browse all Other rulings statewide →

Parties

PlaintiffHillsboro Brown Capital, LLC
OtherCMX Distribution Inc.

Attorneys

Gina M. Austin(Austin Legal Group)for Other
Tamara Rozmus(Austin Legal Group)for Other

Ruling

Cross-Defendant to give notice

106 Hillsboro Brown Capital, LLC vs. Taft

19-01087702 Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel of Record Gina M. Austin and Tamara Rozmus of Austin Legal Group (“Moving Attorneys”) move to be relieved as counsel of record for CMX Distribution Inc. A motion to be relieved as counsel must be accompanied by a declaration on the mandatory Declaration in Support of Attorney’s Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel-Civil (form MC-052). Without that form, the Court cannot determine whether service on the client was properly done at the last known address and what steps were made to confirm that the client’s last known address is current.

The hearing on the motion is CONTINUED to 08/04/2026 at 10:00 AM. Moving Attorneys are ORDERED to file a supplemental declaration on the correct form with all required information. Moving Attorneys are also ORDERED to file a revised proposed order reflecting all currently pending hearing dates. These filings are to be submitted no later than nine court days before the continued hearing date. Moving Attorneys to give notice.

108 Schiller vs. Fivefold Properties Dunnegan, LLC

24-01380115 1. Motion to Enforce Court Order 2. Order to Show Cause re: Default as to Fivefold Properties Dunnegan LLC Plaintiff Shanti Schiller (“Plaintiff”) will and hereby does move the Court for an order (1) compelling Defendant Jennifer Leonard (“Defendant”) to comply with the Court’s February 5, 2026 order (the “Order”); (2) imposing monetary sanctions upon Defendant in the sum of $6,107.00 for reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs incurred in connection with Plaintiff’s efforts to

Cited authorities

Extracting citations from the ruling text…
Verify against the source PDF — LLM extraction may miss or mis-normalize citations.

Looking for case law or statutes not cited here? Search published authorities

Ask about this ruling

Examples: “Why did the court rule this way?” · “What were the procedural grounds?” · “Is appearance required?”

Answers reference only this ruling's text. Not legal advice — always verify against the source PDF.

Find similar rulings

Source

Share