Yaqub v. Nossaman, Guthner et al.

Filed 5/18/06  Yaqub v. Nossaman, Guthner et al. CA6

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS

California Rules of Court, rule 977(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 977(b).  This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

SIXTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

NIZAR YAQUB,                                                                     H028769

                        Plaintiff, Cross-Defendant

and Appellant,                                          (Monterey County

                                                                                                 Superior Court

            v.                                                                                 No. M65574)

NOSSAMAN, GUTHNER, KNOX

& ELLIOTT, LLP,

                        Defendant, Cross-Complainant

and Respondent.

_____________________________________/

            Plaintiff Nizar Yaqub brought an action against his former attorneys for abandonment and breach of contract.  Plaintiff alleged that defendants Nossaman, Guthner, Knox, & Elliott, and two of its attorneys, John P. Wagner and Robert J. Sullivan, breached the parties' agreement for legal services and improperly withdrew as counsel before he was to appear before the California Medical Board (Medical Board) regarding professional misconduct.  Defendants brought a motion for summary judgment, which the trial court granted.  On appeal, plaintiff contends: (1) the trial court erred in finding that Code of Civil Procedure section 284,[1] which outlines the procedures for an attorney to withdraw from a case, did not apply to administrative proceedings; and (2) defendants failed to establish that they were entitled to judgment in their favor as a matter of law.  We find no error and affirm.

I.  Factual and Procedural Background

A.  The Complaint[2]

            Plaintiff alleged the following facts in his complaint.  Plaintiff and defendants entered into an agreement on January 23, 2002 in which defendants agreed to represent plaintiff in proceedings before the Medical Board. Pursuant to this agreement, plaintiff deposited a retainer of $15,000 into defendants' trust account.  On April 4, 2002, Wagner requested that plaintiff deposit an additional retainer of $50,000.  Plaintiff paid the sum of $32,363.42, and defendant continued to represent him.  The Medical Board then scheduled a prehearing for October 2002.  On June 25, 2002, Sullivan requested an additional retainer of $50,000, which plaintiff was unable to produce.  In early September 2002, the Medical Board continued the prehearing until January 31, 2003, and set the date of the hearing for March 2003.  In December 2002, defendants terminated their representation of plaintiff.

            Based on these allegations, the complaint stated two causes of action.  The first cause of action alleged abandonment under section 284.  Plaintiff alleged that defendants terminated their representation without obtaining either leave of the administrative law judge or plaintiff's consent.  He further alleged that he suffered damages as a result of defendants' action.

            The second cause of action alleged breach of contract.  Plaintiff alleged that defendants unreasonably modified their agreement by demanding an additional retainer of $50,000.  After plaintiff rejected the modification, defendants terminated their services and breached the agreement.  Plaintiff further alleged that he performed his obligations under the agreement, and that he suffered damages as a result of defendants' breach.

            Attached to plaintiff's complaint was a copy of the parties' agreement, dated January 23, 2002.  It provided that plaintiff would pay â€