ODK Capital LLC vs Method Builders Inc; Robert Gilcrest
ODK Capital LLC vs Method Builders Inc; Robert Gilcrest
Case Number
23CV04987
Case Type
Hearing Date / Time
Wed, 09/11/2024 - 10:00
Nature of Proceedings
Jeffery Boykin’s Motion to be Relieved as Counsel for both Defendants
Tentative Ruling
Angie Hoar for Plaintiff
Jeffery Boykin for Defendants
Issue
Jeffery Boykin’s Motion to be Relieved as Counsel for both Defendants.
RULING
1. The Motion is GRANTED. There are proposed orders submitted that the Court intends to sign.
2. The trial date of 11/13/24 at 11:30am is confirmed.
3. A Case Management Conference is set for 10/2/24 at 8:30am for the Defendants to appear and disclose how they intend to go forward. That is, will Robert Gilcrest represent himself or will he have counsel on board ready to go to trial. Method Builders cannot be self-represented so will need to be represented by a lawyer if they intend to participate.
4. Plaintiff’s counsel to give notice.
Analysis
Counsel states that Defendants would not voluntarily consent to his request to be relieved, which he made by email and telephone on March 13, May 9, and August 3. He states he has had no contact with Defendants in calendar year 2024 except a brief telephone conversation (the declarations in the two motions differ, with on stating that conversation occurred on August 3, and the other stating it occurred on August 13; the Court finds that given that counsel has declared in both motions that he made his final request to be relieved on August 3, that the declaration which states that the brief telephone conversation occurred on August 13 is a typo, and that it actually occurred on August 3.
The Declarations are sufficient.
The unverified complaint was filed in 11/2023 and the unverified answer was filed in 12/2023. Plaintiff sues on breach of contract to collect the sum of $115,200 for failure to repay the business loan allegedly provided by Plaintiff to Defendants at Defendants' request. Defendants deny that Plaintiff is entitled to any relief against Defendants on any ground whatsoever and deny that Plaintiff is entitled to damages against Defendants in any amount.
The Court has seen the Proof of Service filed by Mr. Boykin on 8/3/24 giving his clients notice of this hearing.
The Court intends to move this case along. Defendants need to be prepared.