Douraghi vs. Douraghi

Defendants, and (6) conspiracy against all moving Defendants. (ROA 2.)

Plaintiff Kristina Danze did not oppose any of the three demurrers.

Based on Plaintiff’s non-opposition, the Court may “deem plaintiff[] to have abandoned the issues” or “claims” addressed in the Demurrers. (Herzberg v. County of Plumas (2005) 133 Cal.App.4th 1, 20.) The non-opposition is considered an implied concession to the merit of Defendants’ arguments presented in the Demurrers. (Herzberg v. County of Plumas (2005) 133 Cal.App.4th 1, 20; DuPont Merck Pharmaceutical Co. v. Superior Court (2000) 78 Cal.App.4th 562, 566 [“By failing to argue the contrary, plaintiffs concede this issue.”]; Glendale Redevelopment Agency v.

Parks (1993) 18 Cal.App.4th 1409, 1424 [holding that “by failed to address” an issue, the issue is “impliedly concede[d].”]; and Westside Center Associates v. Safeway Stores 23, Inc. (1996) 42 Cal.App.4th 507, 529 [“Its failure to address the threshold question of intent effectively concedes that issue and renders its remaining arguments moot.”].)

The Demurrers will be SUSTAINED. As of this date, Plaintiff has not made any attempt to explain whether and how the complaint can be amended. The Court will determine whether to sustain the demurrers with or without leave to amend based on Plaintiff’s response.

Defendants to give notice.

104 Douraghi vs. Douraghi, MOTION TO BE RELIEVED AS COUNSEL – 2020-01137161 GRANTED

Underwood Law Firm, P.C. moves to be relieved as counsel of record for Plaintiffs Iraj Douraghi and Abdol Amir Douraghi. The attorneys identified in the caption for Underwood Law Firm, P.C. are Elijah Underwood and Abel Edens (collectively, “Moving Counsel”). The unopposed Motion is GRANTED, as follows.

Moving Counsel has utilized the Judicial Council Forms (MC-051, MC-052, and MC-053), and has satisfied the

notice, declaration, proposed order, and service requirements of California Rules of Court, rule 3.1362.

Moving Counsel also provides grounds for granting the motion under California Rules of Professional Conduct 1.16(a)(2), (b)(4), (b)(5), (b)(7), (b)(9), and (b)(10). (ROA 375, Judicial Council Form MC-052, Declaration in Support of Attorney’s Motion to be Relieved as Counsel, ¶ 7.)

Moving Counsel has presented a basis for permissive withdrawal under the California Rules of Professional Conduct.

The motion to be relieved as counsel of record is GRANTED.

The Court will sign the proposed order and delete the next scheduled hearing date set forth in paragraph 7(a)- (b) which is listed as “08/03/2026 at 8:30 a.m. in Dept N14” for “Jury Trial.”

The Court will also delete the trial date set forth in paragraph 9(b) which is listed as “08/03/2026 at 8:30 a.m. in Dept. N14.”

The Court will interlineate the trial date set forth in paragraph 9(b) as “11/30/26 at 8:30 a.m. in Department N14.”

The order relieving Moving Counsel as counsel of record for Plaintiff is effective upon counsel filing proof of service of a copy of the signed order, on the client and on all parties that have appeared in the case. (California Rules of Court, rule 3.1362(e).)

Moving Counsel to give notice.

105 Gallagher Law Group OFF CALENDAR - WITHDRAWN v. Leadpin