Judge: Edward B. Moreton, Jr, Case: 23SMCP00235, Date: 2025-06-11 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 23SMCP00235    Hearing Date: June 11, 2025    Dept: 205

Superior Court of California

County of Los Angeles

Beverly Hills Courthouse | Department 205

Background

On May 5, 2025, Petitioner Museum View LLC (“Petitioner”) filed the instant petition to release the property located at 879 Linda Flora Drive, Los Angeles, CA 90049 from a mechanic’s lien recorded by respondent Kevin’z Concrete Services (“Respondent”).

On May 19, 2025, Petitioner filed proof that it served its Petition and Amended Notice of Hearing on Respondent by overnight mail on May 13, 2025.

On the same date, Petitioner filed proof that it served a Second Amended Notice of Hearing on Respondent by overnight mail on May 19, 2025.

Respondent filed no opposition, and Petitioner filed no further papers in support of the petition.

Standard for Release of Mechanic’s Lien

California Civil Code section 8480 provides that the owner of property may petition the court for an order to release the property from the claim of lien if the claimant has not commenced an action to enforce the lien within the time provided in section 8460. (Civ. Code, § 8480(a).) Section 8460 provides that “[t]he claimant shall commence an action to enforce a lien within 90 days after recordation of the claim of lien.” (Id., § 8460(a).) Section 8460 further provides that “[i]f the claimant does not commence an action to enforce the lien within that time, the claim of lien expires and is unenforceable.” (Id.) Section 8460 also provides that the 90-day time limit to commence an action to enforce a lien does not apply if there was an agreement to extend credit and a notice of that fact was recorded within 90 days after recordation of the claim of lien or more than 90 days after recordation of the claim of lien but before a purchaser or encumbrancer for value and in good faith acquires rights in the property. (Id., § 8460(b).) A property owner may not petition for a release order until he or she gives the claimant notice demanding that the claimant execute and record a release of lien claim at least ten days before filing the petition. (Id., § 8482.)

/ / /

Analysis

The petition is denied without prejudice. The Petition is not signed by counsel. Also, Petitioner’s compliance with service requirements is unclear. Several proofs of service attest to overnight delivery / express mail – but Civil Code section 8486(b) requires service “by certified or registered mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested”. If the receipt and proof of delivery attached to the proofs of service are meant to prove the method of mailing, they do not. Also, the proof of service for the operative Second Amended Notice of Hearing does not contain such an attachment, and only states the Notice was served “by United States mail”, with no further method of service specified.

Conclusion

The petition is denied without prejudice.

Dated:   June 11, 2025

__________________________________________

Edward B. Moreton, Jr.

Judge of the Superior Court