Judge: Deborah C. Servino, Case: 30-2021-01220283, Date: 2022-11-04 Tentative Ruling

MOTION TO BE RELIEVED AS COUNSEL

The motion by Jonathan Gerber, to be relieved as counsel for Plaintiff Joe Gorrie, is taken off-calendar as moot, in light of the substitution of attorney filed on October 24, 2022 (ROA 179).

MOTION TO QUASH

Specially appearing Defendant Garrett Guiney’s (“Defendant”) motion to quash service of summons, is granted.

Plaintiff Joe Gorrie filed a proof of service on June 21, 2022, which reflects that Defendant was served on or about June 16, 2022, by substitute service, at 442 San Bernardino Avenue, Newport Beach, CA 92663. (ROA 98.) The court explained in its ruling on Defendant’s prior motion to quash, why 442 San Bernardino Avenue was not a valid place of service for Defendant. Defendant had proffered evidence that he did not live at 442 San Bernardino Avenue, (i.e., his mother’s house). On the other hand, Plaintiff failed to proffer any facts showing that Defendant dwelled at 442 San Bernardino Avenue. (1/14/2022 Minute Order [ROA 66].) There is no evidence that, since the Court’s January 14th ruling, Defendant’s circumstances have changed and that 442 San Bernardino Avenue is now Defendant’s “dwelling house, usual place of abode, usual place of business, or usual mailing address other than a United States Postal Service post office box.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 415.20, subd. (b).) To the contrary, Defendant Karen Guiney expressly denies that Defendant’s living situation “has changed,” and attests that he “does not live at 442 San Bernardino Avenue . . .” (Karen Guiney Decl., at ¶ 3.)

Plaintiff has not opposed the motion, and does not deny that the purported substitute service was invalid. Accordingly, the court grants the motion to quash. The service of summons and Complaint upon Garrett Guiney, on or about June 16, 2022, are hereby ordered quashed.

CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE

The case management conference is continued to January 27, 2023 at 10 am in Department C21, to be heard concurrently with the motion to quash service of summons.

Defendant shall give notice of the ruling and of the continued case management conference.