Judge: Armen Tamzarian, Case: 24STCV24786, Date: 2024-12-09 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 24STCV24786    Hearing Date: December 9, 2024    Dept: 52

Plaintiff’s Motion for Order Permitting Informal Service of Process

Plaintiff Henry Azaryan moves for an order permitting informal service of process on defendant Anahit Arakelyan.  Code of Civil Procedure 413.10, subdivision (c) provides that a summons may be served “[o]utside the United States, as provided in this chapter or as directed by the court in which the action is pending, or, if the court before or after service finds that the service is reasonably calculated to give actual notice, as prescribed by the law of the place where the person is served or as directed by the foreign authority in response to a letter rogatory.  These rules are subject to the provisions of the Convention on the ‘Service Abroad of Judicial and Extrajudicial Documents’ in Civil or Commercial Matters (Hague Service Convention).” 

Service of process outside the United States must both comply with California law and the Hague Service Convention.  (Rockefeller Technology Investments (Asia) VII v. Changzhou SinoType Technology Co., Ltd. (2020) 9 Cal.5th 125, 138 [“ ‘Failure to comply with the Hague Service Convention procedures voids the service even though it was made in compliance with California law’ ”].) 

Defendant lives in Yerevan, Armenia.  (Balayan Decl., ¶ 2.)  Plaintiff seeks to serve defendant via a private process server rather than the Central Authority of Armenia.  Service of process via personal delivery by a private process server is the typical manner of service under California law.  (Code Civ. Proc., § 415.10.) 

This manner of service is also permitted by the Hague Service Convention.  The treaty permits service by informal means when (1) “the receiving state has not objected to” the manner of service and (2) the manner of service “is authorized under otherwise-applicable law.”  (Water Splash, Inc. v. Menon (2017) 581 U.S. 271, 284 [allowing service by mail].)  “Armenia is a signatory” to the Hague Service Convention and has not “made any objections to any of the Hague Convention’s provisions.”  (Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v. Khachatryan (C.D. Cal., Sept. 20, 2021, No. 220CV10020ABPVCX) 2021 WL 5862454, at *2; see also Nelson Decl., ¶ 3.) 

Plaintiff shows good cause for an order permitting informal service of process outside the United States under Code of Civil Procedure 413.10, subdivision (c).  Plaintiff presents testimony by Nelson Tucker, who has written multiple books on service of process and has extensive experience with international service of process in Armenia.  (Tucker Decl., ¶ 1.)  Tucker states, “The most common and customary method for service in Armenia is the informal method.”  (Id., ¶ 3.)  Tucker also states that service via the Central Authority of Armenia results in “serious time delays”, increased “cost of translation,” and will not result in a sufficient proof of service under California law.  (Id., ¶ 4.) 

Disposition

Plaintiff Henry Azaryan’s motion for an order permitting informal service of process on defendant Anahit Arakelyan is granted.  The court hereby orders that plaintiff may serve the summons and complaint on defendant in Armenia via personal delivery by a private process server.