Motion to be Relieved as Plaintiff’s Counsel (Travelstead)
July 8, 2026 Law and Motion Calendar Judge Nicole S. Healy Department 28 ________________________________________________________________________
02:00 PM LINE 1 21-CIV-02564 PEARL WU, MD, ET AL VS. THE PERMANENTE MEDICAL GROUP, INC.
PEARL WU TIMOTHY C. TRAVELSTEAD THE PERMANENTE MEDICAL GROUP, INC. SPENCER DAVIDSON
Motion to be Relieved as Plaintiff’s Counsel (Travelstead)
TENTATIVE RULING:
As an initial matter, pursuant to California Rules of Court, rule 3.1362(a), a motion to be relieved as counsel must be made on Judicial Council Form MC-051 and be accompanied by a declaration on Form MC-052 which states, generally, the reasons why the motion is being brought. (Cal. Rules of Court, rules 3.1362(a) and (c).) Plaintiff’s counsel has not used these mandatory forms. Plaintiff’s counsel shall file the appropriate forms.
More substantively, Dr. Wu has resisted her counsel’s effort to withdraw given the impending five-year deadline (see Code Civ. Proc., § 583.310) which expires on August 24, 2026, and the likelihood of prejudice to Dr. Wu. She has contacted a number of attorneys, all of whom have declined to substitute into this case given these considerations.
At this late stage — with trial set to begin later this month — the court is extremely reluctant to permit plaintiff’s counsel to withdraw without their client having retained substitute counsel. Moreover, although the court can hear from plaintiff’s counsel in camera regarding their claim to have a conflict of interest with Dr. Wu (see Manfredi & Levine v. Superior Court (1998) 66 Cal.App.4th 1128, 1136), hearing otherwise privileged or confidential information creates a very awkward situation for the trial judge regardless of who represents Dr. Wu at trial. Accordingly, the court has determined that another judge should hear from plaintiff and plaintiff’s current counsel, in camera, and report back to this court as to whether an unwaivable ethical conflict exists, and if so, whether that judge recommends that plaintiff’s counsel should be permitted to withdraw.
Looking for case law or statutes not cited here? Search published authorities
Examples: “Why did the court rule this way?” · “What were the procedural grounds?” · “Is appearance required?”
The Honorable David Silberman, in Department 11, has agreed to hear this in camera motion. If Judge Silberman reports that such a conflict exists and recommends that plaintiff’s current counsel be permitted to withdraw, this court will then set a deadline for a date on which Dr. Wu will advise the court and defendant’s counsel that she has obtained substitute representation or that she will represent herself. Any continuance of the trial and extension of the five year statute (see Code Civ. Proc., § 583.304, subd. (c)), will be limited to between three and six months.
Plaintiff and her counsel are ordered to contact Department 11 at dept11@sanmateocourt.org to arrange the in camera hearing.