Judge: Elaine W. Mandel, Case: 22SMCV02549, Date: 2023-03-22 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 22SMCV02549    Hearing Date: March 22, 2023    Dept: P

Tentative Ruling

VST 2020-NPL1 REO, LLC v. Ashley Aarons et al., Case No. 22SMCV02549

Hearing Date March 22, 2023

Defendant Knapp’s Motion to Quash Service of Process

On February 14, 2023 plaintiff VST filed a proof of service of posting of its unlawful detainer post-foreclosure eviction complaint on defendant Knapp, who argues the service is void and moves to quash.

A summons must be issued under the seal of the court in which the action is pending. Cal. Code of Civ. Proc. §412.20(a).

Knapp moves to quash because the summons does not include the court’s seal. Knapp declaration ¶2. Plaintiff acknowledges the original summons did not include a seal, but the summons has been served again, including a stamp of the court’s seal. Gore declaration ¶¶2-3. The new summons is proper, mooting this motion.

Knapp argues a seal cannot be affixed to a summons with an ink stamp and must use a wax or wafer impression. This is incorrect. Cal. Gov. Code §1931 states “[a] public seal in this state is a stamp or impression made a by a public officer with an instrument provided by law,” while Gov. Code §5501 provides “the authorized officer may cause the seal to be printed, engraved, stamped, or otherwise placed in facsimile thereon” (emphasis added). Stamping in ink is an authorized method of affixing a seal to a summons. Plaintiff properly served. Motion DENIED. Defendant to respond within 6 days.