HUGO SANTOS, AN INDIVIDUAL vs GREAT CENTRAL TRANSPORT, INC. A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION

(Stanley Mosk Courthouse: Dept. 311) August 20, 2026 DEPARTMENT 311 LAW AND MOTION RULINGS Case Number: 24STCV21582 Hearing Date: August 20, 2026 Dept: 311 SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES Civil Division Central District, Stanley Mosk Courthouse, Department 311 Tentative Ruling 24STCV21582 HUGO SANTOS, AN INDIVIDUAL vs GREAT CENTRAL TRANSPORT, INC. A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION | August 20, 2026 8:30 AM | | | NATURE OF PROCEEDINGS: MOTION OF FISHER & PHILLIPS LLP TO BE RELIEVED AS COUNSEL-CIVIL.

RULING: The Court grants the Motion. The Court will complete, sign and file the Form Order received-stamped on July 28, 2026. Moving attorneys, Fisher & Phillips LLP, to give notice. ANALYSIS By the Motion, filed July 28, 2026, counsel moves to be relieved as attorney of record for Defendant GREAT CENTRAL TRANSPORT, INC., by declaring, in the form Declaration, at paragraph 2: "Counsel move to be relieved as counsel for Defendant Great Central Transport, Inc. because irreconcilable differences have led to an irreparable breakdown of the attorney-client relationship."

Here, the form notice, declaration, proposed order, and proof of service sufficiently comply with the requirements for a motion to be relieved as counsel. (See Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1362.) Further, moving counsel's declaration shows a cognizable

ground for withdrawal: A breakdown in the attorney-client relationship (or personality clash). (Estate of Falco v. Decker (1987) 188 Cal.App.3d 1004, 1014.) Finally, no opposing document is filed in order to show any prejudice caused by attorney withdrawal. (See Rules Prof. Conduct, rule 1.16(d); Vann v. Shilleh (1975) 54 Cal.App.3d 192, 197.) Therefore, the Court grants the Motion and will sign the proposed Order counsel submitted. Case Number: 25STCV16834 Hearing Date: August 20, 2026 Dept: 311 SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES Civil Division Central District, Stanley Mosk Courthouse, Department 311 Tentative Ruling 25STCV16834 SIPSY vs WASH GRAND EXCHANGE, LLC | August 20, 2026 8:30 AM | | | NATURE OF PROCEEDINGS: DEFENDANT'S DEMURRER TO PLAINTIFFS' FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT.

DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO STRIKE PORTIONS OF THE FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT. RULING: The Court overrules the Demurrer and denies the Motion to Strike. Twenty days to answer. Plaintiff to give notice. I. BACKGROUND On June 10, 2025, SIPSY (Plaintiff) filed a Complaint against WASH GRAND EXCHANGE, LLC (Defendant). On February 10, 2026, Plaintiff filed the First Amended Complaint (FAC), listing Causes of Action for: 1.