Judge: Edward B. Moreton, Jr, Case: 24SMCV01522, Date: 2025-05-13 Tentative Ruling
Case Number: 24SMCV01522 Hearing Date: May 13, 2025 Dept: 205
Superior Court of California
County of Los Angeles – West District
Beverly Hills Courthouse / Department 205
JANE DOE, a minor and through her guardian ad litem, DAWN ERIKA WARD,
Plaintiff, v.
CULVER CITY UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT, et al.,
Defendants. |
Case No.: 24SMCV01522
Hearing Date: May 13, 2025 order RE: Plaintiff's MOTION FOR LEAVE TO SERVE SUMMONS AND STATEMENT OF DAMAGES BY PUBLICATION OR posting
|
BACKGROUND
This case arises from an assault on a student at a public school. Plaintiff Jane Doe and Defendants J.T. and M.M. attended Culver City High School. Plaintiff claims that beginning in 2022 and continuing through 2024, J.T. and M.M. bullied, harassed and verbally assaulted her. She further claims that their harassment went unchecked by Defendants Culver City Unified School District (“CCUSD”) and Dr. Adrienne Thomas, the school’s principal.
The abuse ended in a vicious attack on Plaintiff on October 13, 2023, when J.T. and M.M. struck Plaintiff on the head causing her to fall to the ground and then repeatedly kicked and punched her, resulting in blunt force trauma to her head, concussion, contusions and lacerations. Plaintiff alleges this assault was witnessed by a CCUSD employee.
This action ensued. Plaintiff sued J.T., M.M., their parents, CCUSD, and Dr. Thomas. Plaintiff has served all defendants except J.T. and her parents. Plaintiff performed a skip trace search for Defendant Jeff Trepagnier (J.T.’s father) which showed his home address was 931 E. Via Carmelitos #79, Long Beach, California. However, when Plaintiff’s process server attempted service, he was told Mr. Trepagnier had moved out four years earlier. A second skip trace search resulted in the same home address.
Plaintiff attempted service on J.T. and J.T.’s mother (Malika Edmondson) at their home address of 239 N. Hillcrest Blvd, Inglewood, California. The process server spoke with a female occupant who stated that they were unknown to her and they did not reside there. Plaintiff then identified a last known address of 931 E. Via Carmelitos #79, Long Beach, California. The process server attempted service at the new address, but the female residing there stated she did not know J.T. or her mother.
This hearing on Plaintiff’s motion for leave to serve the summons and statement of damages on J.T. and her parents by publication. Plaintiff claims she has been unable to serve Defendants despite performing skip traces, conducting social medica investigations, and searching telephone directories. Plaintiff seeks to publish the summons and statement of damages in the Long Beach Press Telegram, a general circulation newspaper in the Long Beach area, where Defendants were last known to reside.
DISCUSSION
Under Code Civ. Proc. § 415.50, a summons may be served by publication if upon affidavit it appears to the satisfaction of the Court that: (1) the party to be served cannot with reasonable diligence be served in another manner; and (2) a cause of action exists against the party upon whom service is to be made or the party to be served has an interest in property that is subject to the jurisdiction of the court or the relief demanded in the action would exclude the party from any interest in the property. Strict compliance is required to obtain leave to serve by publication. (County of Riverside v. Superior Court (1997) 54 Cal.App.4th 443, 450.) Further, constitutional principles of due process of law require that service by publication be used only as a last resort. (Watts v. Crawford (1995) 10 Cal.4th 743, 749 fn. 5.)
The term “reasonable diligence” denotes a thorough, systematic investigation and inquiry conducted in good faith by the party or his agent or attorney. (Id.) The basic test is whether the affidavit demonstrates that the plaintiff took those steps which a reasonable person who truly desired to give notice would have taken under the circumstances. (Donel, Inc. v. Badalian (1978) 87 Cal. App. 3d 327, 333.) This involves a number of honest attempts to learn defendant’s whereabouts or address by inquiry of relatives, by investigation of appropriate city and telephone directories, voter registries, and assessor’s office property indices situated near the defendant's last known location. (Watts, 10 Cal.4th at 749 fn. 5.) These are the likely sources of information, and consequently must be searched before resorting to service by publication. (Id.) Before allowing a plaintiff to resort to service by publication, the Courts necessarily require the plaintiff to show exhaustive attempts to locate the defendant, for it is generally recognized that service by publication rarely results in actual notice. (Id.)
“Diligence is a relative term and must be determined by the circumstances of each case. The question is one for the trial court in the first instance.” (Vorburg v. Vorburg (1941) 18 Cal.2d 794, 797.) “If the facts set forth in the affidavit have a legal tendency to show the exercise of diligence on behalf of the plaintiff in seeking to find the defendant within the state, and that after the exercise of such diligence [she or] he cannot be found, the decision of the judge that the affidavit shows the same to his satisfaction is to be regarded with the same effect as is [her or] his decision upon any other matter of fact submitted to [her or] his judicial determination.” (Id.)
Here, Plaintiff has shown it attempted service on Defendants at their last known addresses. Plaintiff attempted service at Mr. Trapinger’s last known address nine times, and was told Mr. Trapinger no longer lived there. A second skip trace search showed the same address where Mr. Trapinger could not be found. Plaintiff attempted service on J.T. and Ms. Edmondson twice, at two different addresses where they were known to have lived. Plaintiff could not find either at the two addresses. Plaintiff has performed skip trace searches, scoured directories, and conducted social media investigations which have yielded no additional addresses. On these facts, the Court authorizes Plaintiff to serve Defendants by publication in a general publication newspaper in the area where they were last known to have resided, which is most likely to give Defendants notice of this action.
CONCLUSION
For the foregoing reasons, the Court GRANTS Plaintiff’s motion to serve summons and statement of damages on Defendants J.T., Jeff Trapinger and Malika Edmonson by publication in the Long Beach Press Telegram.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED: May 13, 2025 ___________________________
Edward B. Moreton, Jr.
Judge of the Superior Court