Judge: Elaine W. Mandel, Case: 21SMCV01547, Date: 2023-12-07 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 21SMCV01547    Hearing Date: December 7, 2023    Dept: P

Tentative Ruling

Eckrem v. Klasila et al., Case No. 21SMCV01547

Hearing Date December 7, 2023

Defendant Estate of Ka Ping Mak’s Motion to Quash (UNOPPOSED)

Defendant Estate of Ka Ping Mak moves to quash plaintiff Maryanne Ecrkem’s summons and complaint for lack of service.

A defendant is under no duty to respond to a defectively served summons, even if the defendant has actual knowledge of the action. E.g. Kappel v. Bartlett (1988) 200 Cal.App.3d 1457, 1466. Personal service requires “personal delivery of a copy of the summons and complaint on the person to be served.” Cal. Code of Civ. Proc. §415.10.

The Estate claims Eckrem attempted service by mailing a copy of the complaint and summons to property management company RST & Associates. Lam Decl. ¶¶2-3. RST has no affiliation with the Estate and is not authorized to accept service on its behalf. Id. ¶¶4-5.

There is no opposition, so no basis for the court to doubt the statements in the Lam declaration. Service of the complaint and summons on RST was ineffective and will be quashed. GRANTED.