Beauty Partners, Inc. v. [Defendant Not Named]

alleges: 61. Defendants' decision to constructively evict Plaintiff, as opposed to investigating and remediating the contamination, was done in retaliation of Plaintiff's valid and multiple complaints. This conduct is grounds for punitive damages and reasonable attorney's fees in and of itself, without additional evidence of conscious disregard and the purposeful decision to defer necessary and needed maintenance at the Premises. Said eviction caused serious hardship on Plaintiff, both emotionally and financially. Defendants' behavior rose to the level of outrageous, despicable, and malicious conduct that would warrant imposition of punitive damages in an amount sufficient to punish Defendants and deter Defendants and others from engaging in such reckless and intentional conduct in the future. (FAC P. 61.)

Defendants advance the same evidence in support of their motion for summary adjudication of Plaintiff's claim for punitive damages. Accordingly, Defendants have met their initial prima facie burdens of production and persuasion to demonstrate that Plaintiff will be unable to demonstrate Defendants acted with malice or oppression by clear and convincing evidence, and Plaintiff has not opposed the motion to establish otherwise.

CONCLUSION AND ORDER

The Court grants Defendants' motion for summary adjudication and the Court will enter the proposed Order lodged on May 28, 2026

Defendants shall provide notice of the Court's ruling/Order, and file the notice with a proof of service forthwith.

DATED: August 20, 2026 ________/s___________________ Michael E. Whitaker Judge of the Superior Court

[1] "The pleadings play a key role in a summary judgment motion. The function of the pleadings in a motion for summary judgment is to delimit the scope of the issues and to frame the outer measure of materiality in a summary judgment proceeding. As our Supreme Court has explained it: The materiality of a disputed fact is measured by the pleadings, which set the boundaries of the issues to be resolved at summary judgment. Accordingly, the burden of a defendant moving for summary judgment only requires that he or she negate plaintiff's theories of liability as alleged in the complaint; that is, a moving party need not refute liability on some theoretical possibility not included in the pleadings." (Hutton v.

Fidelity National Title Co. (2013) 213 Cal.App.4th 486, 493 [cleaned up]; see also Laabs v. City of Victorville (2008) 163 Cal.App.4th 1242, 1258 ["The complaint limits the issues to be addressed at the motion for summary judgment. The rationale is clear: It is the allegations in the complaint to which the summary judgment motion must respond"].)

RULING

DEPARTMENT | 207 | HEARING DATE | August 20, 2026 | CASE NUMBER |

| MOTION | Motion to be Relieved as Counsel | MOVING PARTY | David M. Brandon | OPPOSING PARTY | (none) |

MOTION

David M. Brandon, counsel for Plaintiff Beauty Partners, Inc. ("Counsel") moves to be relieved as counsel, citing a breakdown of the attorney-client relationship. The motion is unopposed.

LEGAL STANDARD

Code of Civil Procedure section 284 provides "[t]he attorney in an action or special proceeding may be changed at any time before or after judgment or final determination as follows: 1. Upon the consent of both client and attorney, filed with the clerk, or entered in the minutes; 2. Upon the order of the court, upon the application of either client or attorney, after notice from one to the other."

Procedural Requirements

California Rules of Court, rule 3.1362, requires: (1) the motion must be made on form MC-051; (subd. (a)); (2) it must be accompanied by a declaration on form MC-052 stating why the motion is brought under Code of Civil Procedure section 284(2) instead of a consent brought under section 284(1); (subd. (c)); (3) a proposed order on form MC-053 must be lodged with the court, specifying all hearing dates scheduled in the action or proceeding, including the date of trial, if known; (subd. (e)); and (4) The documents must be served on the client and on all parties that have appeared in the case. (subd. (d).)

If the notice is served by mail or electronic service, it must be accompanied by a declaration indicating that the address served is the current address, or in the case of service by mail, that it was served on the last known address and a more current address could not be located after reasonable efforts within 30 days before filing the motion. (Ibid.)

The court may delay the effective date of the order relieving counsel until proof of service of a copy of the signed order on the client has been filed with the court." (Ibid.)

Substantive Requirements

Rules of Professional Conduct, rule 1.16(a) outlines the reasons a lawyer must withdraw from representation of a client: (1) the client is bringing an action, conducting a defense, asserting a position in litigation, or taking an appeal, without probable cause and for the purpose of harassing or maliciously injuring any person; (2) the representation will result in violation of the Rules of Professional Conduct or the State Bar Act; (3) the lawyer's mental or physical condition renders it unreasonably difficult to carry out the representation effectively; or (4) the client discharges the lawyer.

Rules of Professional Conduct, rule 1.16(b) outlines the reasons a lawyer may withdraw from representation of a client: (1) the client insists upon presenting a claim or defense in litigation, or asserting a position or making a demand in a non-litigation matter, that is not warranted under existing law and cannot be supported by good faith argument for an extension, modification, or reversal of existing law; (2) the client either seeks to pursue a criminal or fraudulent course of conduct or has used the lawyer's services to advance a course of conduct that the lawyer reasonably believes was a crime or fraud; (3) the client insists that the lawyer pursue a course of conduct that is criminal or fraudulent; (4) the client by other conduct renders it unreasonably difficult for the lawyer to carry out the representation effectively; (5) the client breaches a material term of an agreement with, or obligation, to the lawyer relating to the representation, and the lawyer has given the client a reasonable warning after the breach that the lawyer will withdraw unless the client fulfills the agreement or performs the obligation; (6) the client knowingly and freely assents to termination of the representation; (7) the inability to work with co-counsel indicates that the best interests of the client likely will be served by withdrawal; (8) the lawyer's mental or physical condition renders it difficult for the lawyer to carry out the representation effectively; (9) a continuation of the representation is likely to result in a violation of these rules or the State Bar Act; or (10) the lawyer believes in good faith in a proceeding pending before a tribunal that the tribunal will find the existence of other good cause for withdrawal.

DISCUSSION

Counsel has filed forms MC-051, MC-052, and MC-053. The attorney declaration (MC-052) indicates that the motion was filed instead of filing a consent because "An irreconcilable breakdown in the attorney-client relationship has occurred such that counsel can no longer effectively communicate with or represent the client." (MC-052 at P. 2.) As such, the Court finds that the motion complies with the Rules of Professional Conduct, rule 1.16(b)(4).)

The proof of service indicates each of these forms were served electronically on the client and on counsel for Defendant and additionally by mail on the client. The attorney declaration further indicates the client's addresses have been confirmed current within the past 30 days by e-mail with the clients. (MC-052, P. 3.) Therefore, the Court finds that the motion is procedurally proper.

CONCLUSION AND ORDER

Having found the Motion both procedurally and substantively proper, the Court Grants Counsel's Motion to be Relieved as Counsel.

Counsel must serve the signed order (form MC-053), which shall include information about all future hearings and proceedings noticed by any party, or ordered by the Court, on the client and all other parties who have appeared in the action, within 10 days of the date of this Order, and file a proof of service of such.

Counsel will remain the attorney of record for Plaintiff Beauty Partners, Inc. until Counsel files the requisite proof of service. (See Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1362(e).)

Further, to ensure that the Court's records are updated following the filing of the proof(s) of service, Counsel shall contact the Court to advise that the proof of service has been filed.

DATED: August 20, 2026 _______/s/____________________ Michael E. Whitaker Judge of the Superior Court

Case Number: 25SMCV03191 Hearing Date: August 20, 2026 Dept: 207

TENTATIVE RULING

DEPARTMENT | 207 | HEARING DATE | August 20, 2026 | CASE NUMBER | 25SMCV03191 | MOTIONS | Demurrer and Motion to Strike Portions of Second Amended Complaint | MOVING PARTIES | Defendants Sean Combs; Daddy's House Recordings, Inc.; CE Opco, LLC d/b/a Combs Globa f/k/a Combs Enterprises LLC; Bad Boy Entertainment Holdings, Inc.; Bad Boy Productions Holdings, Inc.; Bad Boy Books Holdings, Inc.; Bad Boy Entertainment LLC; and Bad Boy Productions, LLC | OPPOSING PARTY | none |

MOTIONS

This case arises from allegations of sexual assault.