Judge: John J. Kralik, Case: EC068901, Date: 2022-12-30 Tentative Ruling
Case Number: EC068901 Hearing Date: December 30, 2022 Dept: NCB
North
Central District
|
cavalry spv i,
llc as assignee of synchrony bank fka ge capital retail bank, Plaintiff, v. meri penesyan.,
Defendant. |
Case No.: EC068901 Hearing
Date: December 30, 2022 [TENTATIVE]
order RE: motion to set aside default and default judgment |
BACKGROUND
A. Allegations
Plaintiff Cavalry SPV I, LLC, as assignee
of Synchrony Bank fka GE Capital Retail Bank (“Plaintiff”) alleges that Synchrony
Bank fka GE Capital Retail Bank issued a Lowe’s credit card account to Defendant
Meri Penesyan (“Defendant”). Plaintiff
alleges that it is a debt buyer and purchased the debt after charge-off. Plaintiff alleges that as of June 25, 2015,
Defendant’s balance on the account was $28,809.43.
The complaint,
filed August 14, 2016, alleges causes of action for: (1) account stated and (2)
money lent.
B. Relevant
Background
On
January 31, 2019, Plaintiff filed a Declaration of Non-Service stating that its
process server had unsuccessfully attempted to serve Defendant at 1953 Erin
Way, Glendale, CA 91206 from December 30, 2018 to January 23, 2019 over 7
occasions.
On
March 6, 2019, Plaintiff applied to serve Defendant by publication. On April 9, 2019, the Court entered the Order
for Publication, allowing Plaintiff to serve Defendant by publication in LA
Weekly at least once for four consecutive weeks.
On
May 17, 2019, Plaintiff filed a Proof of Publication.
On
July 24, 2019, the default of Defendant was entered.
On
July 29, 2019, the default judgment of Defendant was entered in the total
amount of $29,926.67.
C. Motion
on Calendar
On
November 28, 2022, Defendant filed a motion to set aside the default and
default judgment.
There was no
opposition to the motion.
DISCUSSION
Defendant moves to set aside the
default and default judgment and for leave to file an answer to the complaint. Defendant
moves on the grounds that she did not have actual notice of the action, the
default and default judgment were entered without Defendant being properly
served, and the judgment is void as a matter of law.[1] Defendant provides a copy of the proposed
answer as Exhibit H to the motion.
In support of the motion, Defendant
provides her declaration. She states
that she was never personally served with the summons and complaint in this
action. (Def.’s Decl., ¶2.) She states that her relevant address was and still
is 350 N. Glendale Avenue #B181. (Id.,
¶3.) Defendant states that at no time
did she receive a copy of the summons and complaint in the mail or a Notice of
Acknowledgement & Receipt in connection with this action at any address. (Id., ¶4.) Defendant states she only became aware of
this action and the judgment on November 21, 2022, when she received a Notice
of Levy. (Id., ¶5.)
In the complaint, Plaintiff alleges
that Defendant is believed to reside at 350 N Glendale Ave, Ste. B, Glendale,
CA 91206. (Compl., ¶9.) Exhibit A of the complaint includes the
Lowe’s Credit Card Account information, showing that Defendant’s address is
located at 350 N. Glendale Ave #B181 in Glendale. (Compl., Ex. A [Application at p.1].)
In contrast, the Declaration of Non
Service indicates that service of the summons and complaint was attempted on
Defendant at 1953 Erin Way in Glendale. (Mot.,
Ex. B.) In his Reasonable Due Diligence
report, Paul Flynn (process server) indicated that service on Defendant was not
completed on September 9, 2018 because, per resident at 1953 Erin Way,
Defendant did not reside at the property.
(Mot., Ex. C [Decl. in Support of Pl.’s App. for Publication of Summons
on Defendant at Ex. 2].) The proof of
service shows that service was not attempted at 350 N. Glendale Ave #B181. Further, Defendant argues that after
Plaintiff attempted to serve Defendant via publication, Plaintiff did not make
service of the summons and complaint by mail.
The Court’s order directed Plaintiff
to make service by publication and to mail the summons and complaint to
Defendant’s address before the expiration of the time prescribed for
publication of the summons. (Mot., Ex. F
[4/9/19 Order for Publication]; see also CCP § 415.50(b).) The proof of publication filed on May 17,
2019 only makes statements under the penalty of perjury that notice of the
action was published in LA Weekly and an excerpt of the notice. (Mot., Ex. G.) However, as indicated by Defendant, there is
no proof of service showing that the summons and complaint were mailed to
Defendant.
Based on these facts, it does not
appear that service was properly effectuated on Defendant because Plaintiff did
not attempt service at Defendant’s address as indicated in the complaint or the
credit application, Defendant stated under the penalty of perjury that she has
resided at 350 N. Glendale Avenue #B181 for all relevant times to the present,
and service by publication was not completed as Plaintiff did not mail the
documents to Defendant.
Thus, the judgment is void. (See CCP § 473(d).) The
motion is granted.
CONCLUSION
AND ORDER
Defendant Meri Penesyan’s motion to set
aside the default and default judgment is granted.
A Case Management Conference is set on
March 2, 2023, at 8:30 a.m. in Department B.
Defendant shall give notice of
this order.
[1] To the extent
that Defendant is moving pursuant to CCP § 473.5, such relief is not
appropriate as the time to bring this motion would have passed. Default judgment was entered on July 29, 2019
and the motion was filed on November 28, 2022, which is over 2 years from the
entry of default judgment. (See CCP §
473.5(a).)