Judge Holly J. Fujie, Case Number: 24STCV02008, Date: 2024-08-20 Tentative Ruling

DEPARTMENT 56 JUDGE HOLLY J. FUJIE, LAW AND MOTION RULINGS. The court makes every effort to post tentative rulings by 5.00 pm of the court day before the hearing. The tentative ruling will not become the final ruling until the hearing [see CRC 3.1308(a)(2)], and are also available in the courtroom on the day of the hearing [see CRC 3.1308(b)]. If the parties wish to submit on the tentative ruling and avoid a court appearance, all counsel must agree and choose which counsel will give notice. That counsel must 1) call Dept 56 by 8:30 a.m. on the day of the hearing (213/633-0656) and state that all parties will submit on the tentative ruling, and 2) serve notice of the ruling on all parties. If any party declines to submit on the tentative ruling, then no telephone call is necessary and all parties should appear at the hearing in person or by Court Call. Court reporters are not provided, and parties who want a record of motions and other proceedings must hire a privately retained certified court reporter.

MOVING PARTY: Plaintiff ALISA C. SCHLESINGER, individually and as Trustee of the ALISA C. SCHLESINGER TRUST (“Plaintiff”)

This is an action arising out of a residential construction contract alleged to have been entered into in February 2019. Plaintiff filed a complaint on January 25, 2024, against Defendants TNL Renovation Inc. (“TNL”); Meir Levi; and Tomer Levi (collectively, “Defendants”), seeking damages for breach of contract stemming from Defendants’ alleged failure to complete the contracted work.

Plaintiff contends that Meir Levi and Tomer Levi are alter egos of TNL, and that she is suing both in said capacity. TNL and Meir Levi have been served. Plaintiff now moves for leave to serve Tomer Levi by publication. The motion is unopposed.

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.)

Pursuant to Code Civ. Proc., § 415.50, subd. (a), the party wishing to serve by publication must, by affidavit, satisfy the court in which the action is pending that the person to be served cannot with reasonable diligence be served in another manner specified in Article 3, pertaining to manner of service of summons. (Code Civ. Proc., §§ 415.10 to 415.50.) The affidavit should detail a thorough search to locate the person to be served, indicating that the party seeking leave to serve by publication has made a number of honest attempts to learn the whereabouts or address of the person to be served by asking the person's employer, friends, relatives, and acquaintances, and by investigating the appropriate city and telephone directories, the voters' register, and the real and personal property index in the assessor's office, near the person's last known location. (Judicial Council Comment to Code Civ. Proc., § 415.50; Monterey S. P. Partnership v. W. L. Bangham, Inc., 49 Cal. 3d 454.)

Here, Plaintiff contends that despite diligent efforts to serve Tomer Levi at three different addresses associated with him, discovered via searches on the Contractor’s State License Board and California Secretary of State, all efforts have failed. Hence, Plaintiff seeks service of Tomer Levi by publication.

Plaintiff submits the declaration of her counsel, Alan J. Carnegie (“Carnegie”) in support of the instant motion (“Carnegie Decl.”). Carnegie attests that he attempted to serve Tomer Levi at three different addresses: 1) at the Buenaventura address listed with the CSLB (Contractor’s State License Board) and where Meir Levi and TNL were served; 2) at the La Cienega address of the company with whom Tomer Levi is presently affiliated; and 3) at the Ventura Blvd. address on file with the California Secretary of State. (Carnegie Decl., ¶ 3.) Carnegie attached as exhibits to his declaration the Declarations of Diligence by the attorney service he used, Janney & Janney, which summarized service efforts done at the La Cienega and Ventura Blvd. addresses. (Id., Exhs. A and B.) Also attached as an exhibit is a correspondence between County Legal and Carnegie outlining the failed service attempts at the Buenaventura address by County Legal. (Id., Exh. C.)

Plaintiff’s motion is unopposed. Carnegie’s declaration is sufficient to establish that Tomer Levi cannot be served in another manner with reasonable diligence.¿

Accordingly, Plaintiff’s motion for leave to serve Tomer Levi by publication is GRANTED.

Parties who intend to submit on this tentative must send an email to the Court at SMC_DEPT56@lacourt.org as directed by the instructions provided on the court website at www.lacourt.org. If the department does not receive an email and there are no appearances at the hearing, the motion will be placed off calendar.

Hon. Holly J. Fujie

Judge of the Superior Court