JORGE GUZMAN vs PIZARRO CONSTRUCTION CO, INC., et al.

(Stanley Mosk Courthouse: Dept. 311) August 25, 2026 DEPARTMENT 311 LAW AND MOTION RULINGS

COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES Civil Division Central District, Stanley Mosk Courthouse, Department 311 Tentative Ruling

JORGE GUZMAN vs PIZARRO CONSTRUCTION CO, INC., et al. | August 25, 2026 8:30 AM | | | NATURE OF PROCEEDINGS: MOTION OF LAW OFFICES JOHN G. WURN 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 15, 2026. Moving counsel John G. Wurn to give notice. ANALYSIS: By the Motion, filed July 15, 2026, counsel moves to be relieved as attorney of record for Defendant MARCELO PIZZARO, by declaring, in the form Declaration, at paragraph 2: "Attorney client relatioship [sic] has been broken and cannot be restored".

The form notice, declaration, proposed order, and proofs 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.)

No opposing document has been 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.) On August 12, 2026, the Clerk rejected a Request for Entry of Default as to unrepresented Co-Defendant PIZARRO CONSTRUCTION CO, INC. that filed no Answer. The Court grants the Motion and will sign the proposed Order submitted. Case Number: 24STCV21522 Hearing Date: August 25, 2026 Dept: 311 SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES Civil Division Central District, Stanley Mosk Courthouse, Department 311 Tentative Ruling 24STCV21522 LANDRUS CLARK vs SOHAIL ZAVERI, et al. | August 25, 2026 8:30 AM | | | NATURE OF PROCEEDINGS: DEFENDANT DOORDASH, INC.'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT OR, IN THE ALTERNATIVE, SUMMARY ADJUDICATION.

RULING: The Court denies the Motion for Summary Judgment and Alternative Motion for Summary Adjudication. Plaintiff to give notice. I. BACKGROUND On August 23, 2024, LANDRUS CLARK (Plaintiff) filed a form Complaint against SOHAIL ZAVERI and DOORDASH, INC. (Defendants), identifying a Cause of Action for Motor Vehicle. Plaintiff alleges that Defendants' negligence caused an accident at the intersection of La Brea Avenue, Stocker Street and Overhill Drive, in Los Angeles. On July 28, 2026, Plaintiff filed the Motion for Leave to file the proposed form, First Amended Complaint (FAC) that since has been filed on August 14, 2026, encompassing both vicarious