Judge: Margaret L. Oldendorf, Case: 23AHCV00021, Date: 2023-04-11 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 23AHCV00021    Hearing Date: April 11, 2023    Dept: P

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES

NORTHEAST DISTRICT

 

JOSE BLANCO, et al.,

 

                                            Plaintiffs,

vs.

 

LEVON H. BARDAKJIAN, et al.,

 

                                            Defendants.

 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)
)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No.: 23AHCV00021

 

[TENTATIVE] ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ UNOPPOSED MOTION TO QUASH SERVICE OF THE SUMMONS AND COMPLAINT

 

Date:   April 11, 2023

Time:  8:30 a.m.

Dept.:  P

 

            I.         INTRODUCTION

            This is a complaint by approximately 50 plaintiffs against their landlords. There are five named defendants: (1) Levon H. Bardakjian individually; (2) Sylvia R. Bardakjian individually; (3)(4) Levon and Sylvia as trustees of the Levon H. Bardakjian and Sylvia R. Bardakjian Family Trust dated July 24, 2004; (5) 1001 Las Lomas, LLC. The complaint alleges ten causes of action stemming from Plaintiffs’ tenancy at an apartment complex owned by Defendants.

            Defendants specially appear to contest jurisdiction. The declarations of Levon and Sylvia Bardakjian establish that attempted service on them (individually and as trustees of the trust and as to Levon as the agent for service of process of the LLC) was ineffective. Plaintiffs have not filed any contrary evidence. The motion is therefore granted.

 

II.        LEGAL STANDARD

            A defendant, on or before the last day to plead, may serve and file a motion to quash service of summons on the ground of lack of jurisdiction over him or her. Code Civ. Proc. §418.10(a)(1).

            When a defendant challenges the court’s jurisdiction based on improper service of the summons, the burden is on the plaintiff to prove effective service. Summers v. McClanahan (2006) 140 Cal.App.4th 403, 413.

 

III.      ANALYSIS

            The proofs of service filed in this action indicate that each of the five defendants was served by substitute service at the same time. The proofs of service indicate that the process server attempted service on all defendants at 330 Tocino Drive in Duarte; that after a diligent search none was found there; and that all five defendants were served by substitute service by leaving the papers with “Margaret B. – unknown relationship.”

            The Declaration of Levon Bardakjian declares that he was not personally served with the summons and complaint, and that he does not reside at the Tocino address identified in the proofs of service.  In fact, he declares that he lives outside of the United States and did so on the purported date of service. He further declares that he does not know anyone named “Margaret B.” Finally, Mr. Bardakjian states that he is the agent for service of process for 1001 Las Lomas, LLC.

            The Declaration of Sylvia R. Bardakjian contains all the same information, except that it omits reference to the LLC.

            Based on this undisputed evidence, the substituted service attempted January 15, 2023 on all five defendants was ineffective. No jurisdiction was acquired by way of such service.

            It is noted that a subsequent proof of service was filed as to the LLC, reflecting  proof of service of the summons and complaint on the secretary of state on March 8, 2023. This motion does not address that attempt at service.

 

IV.      CONCLUSION

            Defendants’ unopposed motion to quash is granted. The proofs of service filed February 1, 2023, purporting to show substituted service on January 15, 2023, are quashed.

            This order has no effect on the proof of service filed March 13, 2023 as to 1001 Las Lomas, LLC.

            Defendants are ordered to give notice of this ruling.

           

 

           

Dated:                                                                        _______________________________

                                                                                          MARGARET L. OLDENDORF

                                                                                 JUDGE OF THE SUPERIOR COURT