DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
26CV185697·alameda·Civil·Civil
Hearing todayGRANTED

RAMOT vs KALANIT, INC, et al.

Motion to be Relieved as Counsel

Hearing date
Sep 2, 2026
Department
18
Prevailing
Moving Party

Motion type

Browse all Other rulings statewide →

Parties

PlaintiffSARITA RAMOT
DefendantKALANIT, INC. dba Buttercup
DefendantButtercup Grille, Inc. dba Buttercup
DefendantRestaurant Adventures II, Inc., dba Buttercup
DefendantVered, Inc. dba Buttercup
DefendantD.S.M.G. Inc.

Attorneys

Andrew Weaver(The Sentinel Firm, APC)for Plaintiff

Ruling

26CV185697: RAMOT vs KALANIT, INC, et al. 09/02/2026 Hearing on Motion to be Relieved as Counsel filed by SARITA RAMOT (Plaintiff) CRS# 468481731327 in Department 18

Tentative Ruling - 09/01/2026 Patrick McKinney

The Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel filed by SARITA RAMOT on 07/23/2026 is Granted.

I. Legal Standard “The attorney in an action or special proceeding may be changed at any time before or after judgment or final determination . . . [u]pon the order of the court, upon the application of either client or attorney, after notice from one to the other.” (Code Civ. Proc. § 284(2).) An attorney’s declaration in support of their motion “must state in general terms and without compromising the confidentiality of the attorney-client relationship why a motion under Code of Civil Procedure section 284(2) is brought instead of filing a consent under Code of Civil Procedure section 284(1).” (R. Ct. 3.1362(c).) Finally, the attorney must serve and lodge an order granting attorney’s motion to be relieved as counsel—civil (Form MC-053), “specify[ing] all hearing dates scheduled in the action or proceeding, including the date of trial, if known.” (Id. 3.1362(e).)

II.

Discussion

The Sentinel Firm, APC, represents Plaintiff Sarita Ramot in this matter. The Declaration of Andrew Weaver in support of this motion states that Plaintiff entered into a settlement agreement with Defendants Kalanit, Inc. dba Buttercup; Buttercup Grille, Inc. dba Buttercup; Restaurant Adventures II, Inc., dba Buttercup; Vered, Inc. dba Buttercup; and D.S.M.G. Inc. (“Defendants”) without consulting with or informing the attorneys representing her. (Weaver Decl., ¶ 4.) Upon counsel asking Plaintiff about the settlement, she allegedly demanded that they withdraw as her counsel via text message. (Id. at ¶ 5.) Mr. Weaver then advised counsel for Defendants of his firm’s intention to withdraw. (Id. at ¶ 7.)

III. Order The motion is GRANTED. The court will sign the proposed order submitted with the moving papers.

CONTESTING TENTATIVE ORDERS

Notify the Court and all other parties no later than 4:00 pm the day before the scheduled hearing and identify the issues you wish to argue through the following steps.

1. Log into eCourt Public Portal - https://eportal.alameda.courts.ca.gov 26CV185697: RAMOT vs KALANIT, INC, et al. 09/02/2026 Hearing on Motion to be Relieved as Counsel filed by SARITA RAMOT (Plaintiff) CRS# 468481731327 in Department 18 2. Case Search 3. Enter the Case Number and select Search 4. Select the Case Name 5. Select the Tentative Rulings Tab 6. Select Click to Contest this Ruling 7. Enter your Name and Reason for Contesting 8. Select Proceed.

Cited authorities

Extracting citations from the ruling text…
Verify against the source PDF — LLM extraction may miss or mis-normalize citations.

Looking for case law or statutes not cited here? Search published authorities

Ask about this ruling

Examples: “Why did the court rule this way?” · “What were the procedural grounds?” · “Is appearance required?”

Answers reference only this ruling's text. Not legal advice — always verify against the source PDF.

Find similar rulings

Source

Share