David Kreuz v. Gabriel O. Castillo and Best Choice Hospice Service, Inc.

(Chatsworth Courthouse: Dept. F47) August 19, 2026

Date: 8/19/26 Case #23CHCV03629 MOTION TO BE RELIEVED AS COUNSEL Motion filed on 4/1/26. MOVING ATTORNEY: Christopher Aumais of Good Gustafson Aumais CLIENT: Plaintiff Ovsep Keshisyan RELIEF REQUESTED: An order relieving Christopher Aumais of Good Gustafson Aumais as counsel for Plaintiff Ovsep Keshisyan in this case. RULING: The motion is denied without prejudice.

On 4/1/26, Christopher Aumais of Good Gustafson Aumais filed the instant motion to be relieved as counsel for Plaintiff Ovsep Keshisyan (Plaintiff) in this action. The motion fails because although it is accompanied by an attorney declaration and a proposed order, these documents are not on the required Judicial Council forms MC-052 and MC-053 and they do not include all of the necessary information set forth on those forms. See CRC 3.1362(c), (e).

Additionally, the declarations of service attached to the motion papers indicate that the documents were served by electronic mail. However, the attached service lists indicate that the documents were served on the client "VIA US MAIL." As such, there is no declaration attesting that service of the documents on the client was made by U.S. mail.

Case Number: 25CHCV00893 Hearing Date: August 19, 2026 Dept: F47 Dept. F47 Date: 8/19/26 Case #25CHCV00893 MOTION TO BE RELIEVED AS COUNSEL Motion filed on 6/29/26. MOVING ATTORNEY: Nathan Mubasher CLIENTS: Defendants Gabriel O. Castillo and Best Choice Hospice Service, Inc. RESPONDING PARTY: Plaintiff David Kreuz

RELIEF REQUESTED: An order relieving Nathan Mubasher as counsel for Defendants Gabriel O. Castillo and Best Choice Hospice Service, Inc. RULING: The motion is denied without prejudice.

On 6/29/26, attorney Nathan Mubasher filed the instant motion seeking an order relieving him as counsel for Defendants Gabriel O. Castillo and Best Choice Hospice Service, Inc. On the same date, attorney Mubasher filed a proof of service which indicates that on 6/29/26, the motion was electronically served on counsel for Plaintiff David Kreuz.

On 8/6/26, Plaintiff David Kreuz (Plaintiff) filed and served an opposition to the motion. On 8/12/26, attorney Mubasher filed and served a reply to the opposition. The proof of service attached to the reply also indicates that it was electronically served only on counsel for Plaintiff.

All documents in support of a motion to be relieved as counsel must be served on the client and on all other parties who have appeared in the case. See CRC 3.1362(d). Here, attorney Mubasher has not filed a proof of service showing that the motion papers were served on the clients. Additionally, No. 4.b. in the notice of motion, reflecting that one of the clients is a corporation, is not marked. Further, No.6 in the proposed order does not set forth all of the necessary information for the clients. Instead, it refers to the notice of motion and an attachment thereto. All of the contact information for the clients must be set forth in the proposed order or an attachment to the order itself.

While the foregoing procedural defects require that the motion be denied without prejudice, the opposition does not set forth any viable basis to deny the motion on the merits. The authority cited in the opposition addresses the denial of motions to be relieved as counsel when such would prejudice the client, not the adverse party. See Ramirez (1994) 21 CA4th 904, 915; Flake (2017) 9 CA5th 223, 230. The fact that a corporation will be left without counsel, and therefore cannot appear before the court, does not prevent the granting of a motion to be relieved as counsel. See Gamet (2001) 91 CA4th 1276, 1284 fn.5.

Attorney Mubasher's Request for Judicial Notice is denied. While records of another court are subject to judicial notice. The ruling of another trial court in a similar, but unrelated case, has no bearing on the Court's rulings in this case.

Case Number: 25CHCV03660 Hearing Date: August 19, 2026 Dept: F47 Dept. F47 Date: 8/19/26 Case #25CHCV03660 DEMURRER TO THE ORIGINAL COMPLAINT Demurrer filed on 2/13/26.