DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
CVCV18-0191244·shasta·Civil·Class Action
Hearing in about 1 hourDENIED without prejudice

LOMELI, ET AL. VS. DELIGHT FOODS, ET AL.

Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel

Hearing date
Sep 8, 2026
Department
63
Judge
Prevailing
Opposing Party

Motion type

Browse all Other rulings statewide →

Parties

PlaintiffLomeli
DefendantDelight Foods, Inc.
DefendantSteven Ahrens
DefendantRosa Linda Ahrens

Attorneys

Yue Zhao(Swanson Law Office)for Defendant

Ruling

CASE NUMBER: CVCV18-0191244 Tentative Ruling on Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel: Yue Zhao of Swanson Law Office moves to be relieved as counsel for Defendant Delight Foods, Inc. CRC 3.1362 sets forth the notice requirements for a Motion to be Relieved as Counsel.

Service The notice of motion and motion, the declaration, and the proposed order must be served on the client and on all other parties who have appeared in the case. The notice may be by personal service, electronic service, or mail.

(1) If the notice is served on the client by mail under Code of Civil Procedure section 1013, it must be accompanied by a declaration stating facts showing that either: (A) The service address is the current residence or business address of the client; or (B) The service address is the last known residence or business address of the client and 10

the attorney has been unable to locate a more current address after making reasonable efforts to do so within 30 days before the filing of the motion to be relieved. (2) If the notice is served on the client by electronic service under Code of Civil Procedure section 1010.6 and rule 2.251, it must be accompanied by a declaration stating that the electronic service address is the client's current electronic service address.

As used in this rule, "current" means that the address was confirmed within 30 days before the filing of the motion to be relieved. Merely demonstrating that the notice was sent to the client's last known address and was not returned or no electronic delivery failure message was received is not, by itself, sufficient to demonstrate that the address is current. If the service is by mail, Code of Civil Procedure section 1011(b) applies. CRC 3.1362(d).

The Declaration of Yue Zhao notes that the last known address “was verified via PeopleMap on 2/20/26.” No further information is provided regarding any attempts made to confirm the address. February 20, 2026 is more than 30 days ago.

Counsel has not complied with the notice requirements set forth in CRC 3.1362. The motion is DENIED without prejudice. The proposed Order provided cannot be modified to reflect the Court’s ruling. Delight Food’s counsel is to prepare the Order.

****************************************************************************************** 9:00 a.m. – Review Hearings ****************************************************************************************** COGLITORE HOLDINGS LLC VS. BUNDY

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