Judge: Michael Shultz, Case: 19CMCV00296, Date: 2022-08-25 Tentative Ruling

INSTRUCTIONS: If the parties wish to submit on the tentative ruling and avoid a court appearance on the matter, the moving party must:

1. Contact the opposing party and all other parties who have appeared in the action and confirm that each will submit on the tentative ruling.

2. No later than 4:00 p.m. on the court day before the hearing, call the Courtroom (310-761-4302) advising that all parties will submit on the tentative ruling and waive hearing; and

3. Serve notice of the Court's ruling on all parties entitled to receive service.

If this procedure is followed, when the case is called the Court will enter its ruling on the motion in accordance with its tentative ruling. If any party declines to submit on the tentative ruling, then no telephone call is necessary, and all parties should appear at the hearing. If there is neither a telephone call nor an appearance, then the matter may either be taken off calendar or ruled on. 

TENTATIVE RULINGS -- http://www.lacourt.org/tentativeRulingNet/ui/main.aspx?casetype=civil




Case Number: 19CMCV00296    Hearing Date: August 25, 2022    Dept: A

19CMCV00296 Lawrence Chibueze, et al v. Telops International, Inc., et al

Thursday, August 25, 2022 at 8:30 a.m.

 

RECOMMENDATION: Approve Application for Service of Summons and Complaint on the Secretary of State

 

            The complaint alleges that Defendant, Telops International, Inc., (“Telops”), through their agent, Defendant, Julio Benavente (“Benavente”), forged Plaintiffs’ signatures on contracts for installation of solar panels on Plaintiffs’ home that Plaintiffs never agreed to purchase. Plaintiffs allege claims for fraud, negligent hiring and supervision, slander of title, trespass to land, promissory estoppel and unfair competition.

            Service on Defendant by personal delivery of the summons and complaint on the  Secretary of State is proper where Plaintiffs cannot accomplish service despite due diligence.

"If the agent designated for the service of process is a natural person and cannot be found with due diligence at the address stated in the designation or if the agent is a corporation and no person can be found with due diligence to whom the delivery authorized by Section 2110 may be made for the purpose of delivery to the corporate agent, or if the agent designated is no longer authorized to act, or if no agent has been designated and if no one of the officers or agents of the corporation specified in Section 2110 can be found after diligent search and it is so shown by affidavit to the satisfaction of the court, then the court may make an order that service be made by personal delivery to the Secretary of State or to an assistant or deputy secretary of state …” Corp. Code, § 2111

 

            Plaintiffs’ counsel’s supplemental declaration filed on August 18, 2022, demonstrates that Plaintiffs have diligently sought to serve Telops through its officer at different addresses obtained by search. Personal service in California was not successful. and while the return receipt reflects that someone has twice received the mailing, an acknowledgment of service has not been returned to Plaintiffs. Declaration of Chima Anyanwu. Plaintiffs can claim costs at the time of judgment.