Judge: John J. Kralik, Case: 24NNCV02744, Date: 2024-08-09 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 24NNCV02744    Hearing Date: August 9, 2024    Dept: NCB

 

Superior Court of California

County of Los Angeles

North Central District

Department B

 

 

smk diversified investments llc,

                        Plaintiff,

            v.

 

annie mae, llc,

                        Defendant.

 

  Case No.:  24NNCV02744

 

  Hearing Date:  August 9, 2024

 

[TENTATIVE] order RE:

motion to quash service of summons and complaint

 

BACKGROUND

A.    Allegations

On July 8, 2024, Plaintiff SMK Diversified Investments LLC (“Plaintiff”) filed an unlawful detainer complaint against Defendant Annie Mae, LLC regarding the property located at 9074 De Garmo Ave, Unit C, Sun Valley, CA 91352.  Plaintiff is alleged to be the owner of the premises.  Plaintiff alleges that on September 1, 2023, it entered into a written Commercial Lease Agreement with Defendant.  (Compl., Ex. 1.)  Plaintiff alleges that Defendant was served with a 3-day notice to pay rent or quit on April 27, 2024 and the period for Defendant to comply expired on April 27, 2024.  Plaintiff seeks possession of the premises, costs incurred in this proceeding, past due rent of $39,000, reasonable attorney’s fees, and forfeiture of the agreement.      

B.     Motion on Calendar

On July 26, 2024, Defendant filed a motion to quash service of the summons and complaint.    

The Court is not in receipt of an opposition brief.

DISCUSSION

            Defendant moves to quash Plaintiff’s service of the summons and complaint.  Defendant argues that service was not properly effectuated on its agent for service of process, Eric E. Hughes. 

            The proof of service of the summons and complaint (filed July 15, 2024) states that Defendant was served by substituted service on July 12, 2024 at 11:06 a.m. by leaving the documents with Domineque McCall (front desk security) at Defendant’s place of business located at 9074 De Garmo Ave C, Los Angeles, CA 91352.  The authorized agent for service of process is identified as Eric E. Hughes.  The documents were thereafter mailed on July 12, 2024 to Defendant through Eric Hughes at the aforementioned address.  Service was effectuated by Pablo Lopez, a registered process server.  

Defendant provides a copy of the Statement of Information of Defendant filed with the State of California, Secretary of State on December 12, 2023, which shows that Mr. Hughes’ address for service of process is located at 27847 Conestoga Dr., Rolling Hills Est., CA 90274.  (Mot., Ex. B.)  In contrast, as summarized above, the process server served Defendant at 9074 De Garmo Ave C by leaving the documents with a front desk security guard.  Here, service was not properly effectuated on Defendant by serving its authorized agent for service of process.   

The motion to quash service of the summons and complaint is granted. 

CONCLUSION AND ORDER

            Defendant Annie Mae, LLC’s motion to quash service of the summons and complaint is granted.  Defendant shall provide notice of this order.

 

DATED:  August 9, 2024                                           ___________________________

                                                                              John J. Kralik

                                                                              Judge of the Superior Court