Judge: Steven A. Ellis, Case: 22STCV31575, Date: 2025-05-06 Tentative Ruling

DEPARTMENT 29 - LAW AND MOTION RULINGS IMPORTANT  (PLEASE SEND YOUR E-MAIL TO DEPT. 29 NOT DEPT. 2)

Communicating with the Court Staff re the Tentative Ruling 1. Please notify the courtroom staff by email not later than 9:30 a.m. on the day of the hearing if you wish to submit on the tentative ruling rather than argue the motion. The email address is SSCDEPT29@lacourt.org. Please do not use any other email address. 2. You must include the other parties on the email by "cc." 3. Include the word "SUBMISSION" in all caps in the Subject line and include your name, contact information, the case number, and the party you represent in the body of the email. If you submit on the tentative and elect not to appear at the hearing, the opposing party may nevertheless appear at the hearing and argue the motions. THE COURT WILL HEAR ARGUMENT UNLESS BOTH SIDES SUBMIT ON THE TENTATIVE.  4. Include the words "SUBMISSION BUT WILL APPEAR" if you submit, but one or both parties will nevertheless appear. 5. For other communications with Court Staff a. OFF-CALENDAR should appear in all caps in the Subject line where all parties have agreed to have a matter placed off-calendar. All counsel should be cc'ed (and where appropriate parties not represented by counsel) and the body of the email should state: (a) name and case number; (b) date of proceeding. b. CASE SETTLED should appear in all caps in the Subject line where all parties have agreed that the case has settled for all purposes. All counsel should be cc'ed (and where appropriate parties not represented by counsel) and the body of the email should state: (a) name and case number; (b) whether notice of settlement/dismissal documents have been filed; (c) if (b) has not been done, a date one year from the date of your email which will be a date set by the court for an OSC for dismissal of the case. c. STIPULATION should appear in all caps in the Subject line where all parties have stipulated that a matter before the court can be postponed. All counsel should be cc'ed (and where appropriate parties not represented by counsel) and the body of the email should state: (a) name and case number; (b) what proceeding is agreed to be postponed e.g. Trial, FSC; (c) the agreed-upon future date; (d) whether all parties waive notice if the Court informs all counsel/parties that the agreed-upon date is satisfactory. This communication should be used only for matters that are agreed to be postponed and not for orders shortening time. 6. PLEASE MAKE SURE THAT ALL COMMUNICATIONS WITH COURT STAFF DEAL ONLY WITH SCHEDULING AND ADMINISTRATIVE MATTERS AND DO NOT DISCUSS THE MERITS OF ANY CASE. (UPDATED 6/17/2020) 
IMPORTANT:  In light of the COVID-19 emergency, the Court encourages all parties to appear remotely.  The capacity in the courtroom is extremely limited.  The Court appreciates the cooperation of counsel and the litigants. 
ALSO NOTE:  If the moving party does not contact the court to submit on the tentative and does not appear (either remotely or in person), the motion will be taken off calendar.  THE TENTATIVE RULING WILL NOT BE THE ORDER OF THE COURT.

Case Number: 22STCV31575    Hearing Date: May 6, 2025    Dept: 29

Odom v. Jassal LLC
22STCV31575
Plaintiff’s Motion for Leave to Serve Defendant Through the Secretary of State of California

Tentative

The motion is granted.

Background

On September 27, 2022, Christopher Odom ("Plaintiff") filed a complaint against Jassal LLC dba Dynasty Inn and Does 1 through 20 for premises liability arising out of an incident on June 25, 2020, in which, Plaintiff alleges, he fell down stairs as a result of a missing handrail.

On February 10, 2025, Plaintiff amended the complaint to correct the name of the named defendant to to Jessal LLC dba Dynasty Inn.

On April 4, 2025, Plaintiff filed this motion for leave to serve Jessal LLC dba Dynasty Inn (“Jessal”) through the Secretary of State of California.

No opposition has been filed.

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.”

Similar provisions of the Corporations Code allow service on the Secretary of State for foreign corporations and limited liability companies. (Corp. Code, § 2111, subd. (a), & § 17701.16, subd. (c).)

Discussion

Plaintiff moves for an order authorizing that service of process on Jessal may be made on the California Secretary of State.

Plaintiff first attempted service on Jessal on November 1, 2022, through its agent Amar Patel at the address for service of 19318 Bloomfield Avenue in Cerritos. (Bauman Decl. ¶ 2.) This is apparently a residential address; on November 6, the registered process server spoke to an individual at the residence who stated that Mr. Patel was unknown.  (Id., ¶ 3 & Exh. A.)

Plaintiff confirmed with the U.S. Postal Service that there was no change of address form on file.  (Id., ¶ 4 & Exh. B.)  Plaintiff ran a “skip trace” on Mr. Patel and identified no probable address other than one on Bloomfield Avenue.  (Id., ¶ 5 & Exh. C.)  Plaintiff confirmed with the Secretary of State’s office that the agent for service was Mr. Patel and the address for service was the one on Bloomfield Avenue.  (Id., ¶ 6 & Exh. D.)  Plaintiff again attempted service by mail and personal service on Mr. Patel at the Bloomfield Avenue address.  (Id., ¶¶ 7-9 & Exhs. E-F.)  None of these service attempts were successful.  (Id., ¶ 10.)

On this record, Plaintiff has shown that Jessal’s designated agent cannot with reasonable diligence be found at the address designated for personal delivery of the process.  Plaintiff has also shown process against Jessay cannot be served with reasonable diligence upon the designated agent by personal service, substitute service, or mail service under Code of Civil Procedure sections 415.10 through 415.30. 

According, the motion for leave to serve Jessal through service on the California Secretary of State is granted.

Conclusion

The Court GRANTS Plaintiff’s motion and ORDERS that Plaintiff may serve Jessal, LLC by service on the California Secretary of State under Corporations Code section 17701.16.