Judge: Steven A. Ellis, Case: 22STCV16660, Date: 2025-02-18 Tentative Ruling
Case Number: 22STCV16660 Hearing Date: February 18, 2025 Dept: 29
Pleitez v.
Savedra
22STCV16660
Plaintiff’s Motion for Order Allowing Service of Corporate Defendant via the
Secretary of State
Tentative
The motion is granted.
Background
On
May 19, 2022, Mariela Orellana Pleitez (“Plaintiff”) filed a complaint against David
Alfred Savedra, DS Waters of America, Inc., and Does
1 through 100
for motor vehicle negligence and general negligence arising out of an accident on
May 19, 2020.
No
defendant has appeared.
On
January 21, 2025, Plaintiff filed this motion allowing service of DS Waters of
America, Inc. via the Secretary of State.
Legal Standard
Corporations
Code section 1702, subdivision (a), provides:
“If an
agent for the purpose of service of process has resigned and has not been
replaced or if the agent designated cannot with reasonable diligence be found
at the address designated for personally delivering the process, or if no agent
has been designated, and it is shown by affidavit to the satisfaction of the
court that process against a domestic corporation cannot be served with
reasonable diligence upon the designated agent by hand in the manner provided
in Section 415.10, subdivision (a) of Section 415.20 or subdivision (a) of
Section 415.30 of the Code of Civil Procedure or upon the corporation in the
manner provided in subdivision (a), (b), or (c) of Section 416.10 or
subdivision (a) of Section 416.20 of the Code of Civil Procedure, the court may
make an order that the service be made upon the corporation by delivering by
hand to the Secretary of State, or to any person employed in the Secretary of
State’s office in the capacity of assistant or deputy, one copy of the process
for each defendant to be served, together with a copy of the order authorizing
such service. Service in this manner is deemed complete on the 10th day after
delivery of the process to the Secretary of State.”
Discussion
The agent
for service of process for DS Waters of America, Inc. (“DSWA”) was previously
Corporation Service Company (“CSC”). (Eissagholian Decl., ¶
3 & Exh. A.) On October 4, 2022,
Plaintiff served DSWA through CSC with the summons and complaint. (Id., ¶ 4 & Exh. B.) On June 6, 2023, Plaintiff served DSWA
through CSC with a statement of damages.
(Id., ¶ 5 & Exh. C.) On
January 7 and 8, 2025, CSC sent documents to Plaintiff’s counsel labelled “Rejection
of Service of Process.” (Id., ¶ 6 &
Exh. D.) The first document listed a
variety of potential reasons for the rejection, without identifying which
potential reason applied. (Id., Exh.
D.) The second document stated that DSWA
“is not qualified to do business in the jurisdiction served.” (Ibid.)
Plaintiff has not been able to locate another address for service of
DSWA. (Id., ¶ 7.)
Plaintiff has made a
sufficient showing for an order authorizing service through the Secretary of
State.
Accordingly, the
motion is granted.
Conclusion
The Court GRANTS Plaintiff’s motion for an
order authorizing service on Defendant DS Waters of America, Inc. through the
Secretary of State.
Moving Party is ORDERED to give notice.