DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
25-CIV-02042·sanmateo·Civil·Civil
Hearing 3 months agoGRANTED

JOSEPH G. ORECCHIA VS. CITY OF REDWOOD CITY, ET AL

Plaintiff’s Attorney Hazel S. Chang’s (Wilshire Law Firm, PLC) Motion to be Relieved as Counsel

Hearing date
May 22, 2026
Department
20
Prevailing
Moving Party

Motion type

Browse all Other rulings statewide →

Parties

PlaintiffJOSEPH G. ORECCHIA
DefendantCITY OF REDWOOD CITY

Attorneys

HAZEL S. CHANG(Wilshire Law Firm, PLC)for Plaintiff

Ruling

May 22, 2026 Law and Motion Calendar

HONORABLE MICHAEL L. MAU, Department 20 ________________________________________________________________________ 9:00 AM Line 6 25-CIV-02042 JOSEPH G. ORECCHIA VS. CITY OF REDWOOD CITY, ET AL

JOSEPH G. ORECCHIA HAZEL S. CHANG CITY OF REDWOOD CITY

Plaintiff’s Attorney Hazel S. Chang’s (Wilshire Law Firm, PLC) Motion to be Relieved as Counsel

TENTATIVE RULING:

After review of all of the submitted and relevant pleadings, Hazel S. Chang’s Unopposed Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel is GRANTED, pursuant to CCP Section 284(2) and CRC 3.1362.

Counsel has filed the required Judicial Counsel forms (MC-051 and MC-052), established good cause for withdrawal, and has provided adequate notice. Specifically, the Notice of Entry of the Order Granting Plaintiff’s Ex Parte Application to Advance Hearing on Motion to be Relieved as Counsel for today’s date, as filed on April 15, 2026, reflects service on all counsel and on the named plaintiff. No opposition has been filed. The Court will sign the proposed Order already submitted (MC-053 form), and counsel is relieved upon filing a Proof of Service reflecting that Plaintiff has been served with the signed Order.

Any party who contests a tentative ruling must email Dept20@sanmateocourt.org with a copy to all other parties by 4:00 p.m. stating, without argument, the portion(s) of the tentative ruling that the party contests.

If the tentative ruling is uncontested, it shall become the order of the Court by Minute Order and the proposed Order already submitted.

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