Judge: William A. Crowfoot, Case: 24NNCV00626, Date: 2024-11-08 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 24NNCV00626    Hearing Date: November 8, 2024    Dept: 3

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - NORTHEAST DISTRICT

On March 29, 2024, plaintiff Nickole Medina (“Plaintiff”) filed this action against defendants Richard Mills (“Defendant”), Maryland Hotel (“Hotel”), and Wilbur Mills asserting causes of action for general negligence and premises liability arising from an alleged infestation of bed bugs and other insects in a hotel room located at 202 E. Wilson Ave., Glendale, California.

On September 10, 2024, Plaintiff filed three proofs of service stating that Wilbur Mills, Defendant, and Hotel were each served by substituted service at 2:48 p.m. on September 9, 2024. The summons, complaint, and other case documents were left with “John Doe” at 16726 Bosque Dr., Los Angeles CA 91436, and copies was mailed to that address on the next day. The declaration of diligence attached to the proofs of service for Defendant and Wilbur Mills recounts that the following occurred on September 9:

Defendant exited garage and pulled vehicle to the mail box at street.

Refused to identify himself, refused to accept documents, denied that defendants live at property.

Left documents with John Doe despite his protests, he refused to take the documents and got in vehicle and drove away (leaving documents)

Conducted a motor vehicle ownership search concerning the vehicle he was driving and the vehicle is registered to Richard Mills.

On September 12, 2024, Plaintiff filed three more proofs of service which appear to be identical to the three already on file with the Court.

On October 17, 2024, Defendant and Hotel filed this motion to quash service. The motion is unopposed. Defendant argues he was never served because on September 9, 2024, he had driven down the driveway of his house at 16726 Bosque Drive and backed his vehicle up so that the driver’s side door faced the mailbox. (Mills Decl., ¶ 6.) A photo of the mailbox and the front of Defendant’s house is attached as Exhibit A of his declaration. Defendant states that he had parked his car and was picking up the newspaper next to the mailbox when an unknown male walked downhill along the edge of his driveway towards him. (Mills Decl., ¶ 6.) Defendant states he was not asked to identify himself, he did not deny living at the property, and there was no way that anyone could have attempted to hand him documents while he and his vehicle were parked next to the mailbox. (Mills Decl., ¶ 7, Ex. A.) Defendant also states he heard this person reference an Armenian-sounding name that he was unfamiliar with and responded that he did not know what they were talking about. (Mills Decl., ¶. 7.) Defendant adds that he was “concerned for his safety and was wary of talking to strangers on the street” due to recent crimes in the area. (Mills Decl., ¶ 7.) He then got inside his car and drove away. (Ibid.)

As for Hotel, Hotel argues that it was not properly served because it has never used the Bosque address as its business mailing address or for any other purpose.

When a defendant moves to quash service of summons, the plaintiff has “the burden of proving the facts that did give the court jurisdiction, that is the facts requisite to an effective service.” (Coulston v. Cooper (1966) 245 Cal.App.2d 866, 868.) Plaintiff did not oppose this motion and therefore fails to meet her burden to show that service on either Defendant or Hotel was proper. Accordingly, the motion to quash is GRANTED.

Moving party to give notice.

Dated this 8th day of November 2024

Parties who intend to submit on this tentative must send an email to the Court at ALHDEPT3@lacourt.org indicating intention to submit on the tentative as directed by the instructions provided on the court website at www.lacourt.org. Please be advised that 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 matter. Unless you receive a submission from all other parties in the matter, you should assume that others might appear at the hearing to argue. If the Court does not receive emails from the parties indicating submission on this tentative ruling and there are no appearances at the hearing, the Court may, at its discretion, adopt the tentative as the final order or place the motion off calendar.