Judge: Daniel S. Murphy, Case: 23STCV29880, Date: 2024-01-22 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 23STCV29880    Hearing Date: January 22, 2024    Dept: 32

BACKGROUND

            On December 7, 2023, Plaintiff Oliver Truong filed this unlawful detainer action against Defendant Misha Collins.

            On December 14, 2023, Plaintiff filed a proof of service of the three-day notice to quit.

            On December 18, 2023, Defendant filed the instant motion to quash service of summons, arguing that she never received service of the summons and complaint or three-day notice to quit.

            On January 16, 2024, Plaintiff filed a proof of service of the summons and complaint.

LEGAL STANDARD

“[T]he court in which an action is pending has jurisdiction over a party from the time summons is served on him as provided by Chapter 4 (commencing with Section 413.10).” (Code Civ. Proc, § 410.50(a).) “[A] court acquires jurisdiction over a party by proper service of process or by that party's general appearance.” (In re Jennifer O. (2010) 184 Cal.App.4th 539, 547.) Actual notice of a lawsuit is not a substitute for proper service of process. (Abers v. Rohrs (2013) 217 Cal.App.4th 1199, 1206.) A defendant may serve and file a notice of motion to quash service of summons on the ground that the court lacks jurisdiction. (Code Civ. Proc., § 418.10(a).)

DISCUSSION

            The motion is moot because Plaintiff has filed proofs of service of the summons and complaint and three-day notice to quit.

CONCLUSION

            Defendant’s motion to quash is DENIED.