Judge: Virginia Keeny, Case: 24STCV12959, Date: 2025-05-14 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 24STCV12959    Hearing Date: May 14, 2025    Dept: 45

ART COLONY PROPERTY LLC v. KIARA LANIER

Motion for quash service of summons

Date of Hearing:        May 14, 2025                        Trial Date:       None set 

Department:              45                                            Case No.:        24STCV12959

Moving Party:            Defendant Kiara Lainer

Responding Party:     Plaintiff Art Colony Property LLC

BACKGROUND

On May 22, 2024, Plaintiff Art Colony Property LLC filed a complaint against Kiara Lanier for breach of contract – written lease and common count. Plaintiff alleges on January 21, 2020, Plaintiff entered into a written Lease Agreement with Defendant for certain residential real property. Plaintiff further alleges on May 20, 2024, Defendant vacated the Subject Property and breached the Lease by failing to pay rent, utilities and other charges due under the Lease. Plaintiff also alleges Defendant did not leave the unit in the same condition as when it was leased to her causing Plaintiff to incur monetary damages for cleaning, storage, repairs, and additional move out charges.

[Tentative] Ruling

Defendant’s Motion to Quash Service of Summons is DENIED.

DISCUSSION

Defendant moves the court for order quashing service of summons and complaint on the grounds Defendant was never properly served with the summons and complaint; Plaintiff relied on a fraudulent address; and service by publication was improper as Plaintiff failed to satisfy the legal prerequisites.

“In order to obtain in personam jurisdiction through any form of constructive service there must be strict compliance with the requisite statutory procedures.¿ (Zirbes v. Stratton (1986) 187 Cal.App.3d 1407, 1417, quoting Stamps v. Superior Court (1971) 14 Cal.App.3d 108, 110.)¿ Code of Civil Procedure section 415.50 provides that “[a] summons may be served by publication if upon affidavit it appears to the satisfaction of the court in which the action is pending that the party to be served cannot with reasonable diligence be served in another manner specified in this article and that either: [¶] (1) A cause of action exists against the party upon whom service is to be made or he or she is a necessary or proper party to the action[; or] [¶] (2) The party to be served has or claims an interest in real or personal property in this state that is subject to the jurisdiction of the court or the relief demanded in the action consists wholly or in part in excluding the party from any interest in the property.”¿ (CCP § 415.50(a).) “The court shall order the summons to be published in a named newspaper, published in this state, that is most likely to give actual notice to the party to be served. If the party to be served resides or is located out of this state, the court may also order the summons to be published in a named newspaper outside this state that is most likely to give actual notice to that party.”¿ (CCP § 415.50(b).)¿“The order shall direct that a copy of the summons, the complaint, and the order for publication be forthwith mailed to the party if his or her address is ascertained before expiration of the time prescribed for publication of the summons.”¿ (CCP § 415.50(b).) “[T]he requirements for service of summons by publication must be strictly complied with.”¿(County of Riverside v. Superior Court (1997) 54 Cal.App.4th 443, 450 (emphasis in original).) 

Defendant asserts she has not resided in California since April 18, 2024 and has been living in Thailand since November 2024. Defendant also argues Plaintiff knowingly used an incorrect and fraudulent address to attempt service and subsequently obtain an order for publication without exercising reasonable diligence. As a result, Defendant had no legal notice of the lawsuit and only discovered the matter via an unsolicited email from a third-party attorney who had found the case in public records.

In opposition, Plaintiff argues Defendant’s argument is disingenuous as the declaration in support of the application for publication investigated prior addresses for the business of the Defendant and a prior address provided by her. (02/10/2025 Application for Publication.) Moreover, Defendant provides no evidence to substantiate her claim that the addresses listed were “fraudulent” nor has Defendant provided any evidence that Plaintiff had knowledge Defendant was residing outside the country. Plaintiff argues if this motion is granted, Defendant should be deemed served and required to answer especially given Defendant has already served an answer and general denial on Plaintiff already.

The court declines to find service by publication improper in this case. Defendant fails to provide any evidence that any of the attempted addresses were fraudulent. The declaration presented by Defendant does not provide they were residing out of the country when the publication was issued. Accordingly, the courts finds the requirements of service of summons by publication has been complied with. Plaintiff had submitted an affidavit by someone with knowledge and reasonable diligence was shown (CCP §415.50(a).) Based on the information Plaintiff had, publication was in a newspaper “most likely to give actual notice” as Plaintiff had no reason to believe Defendant was residing outside of California and she had recently resided in a home in Los Angeles county, making publication in a newspaper of general circulation in the county appropriate.  

Accordingly, Defendant’s Motion to Quash Service of Summons and Complaint is DENIED.