Self & Bhamre v. Moza CA4/3

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJanuary 13, 2026G063757California916 words

Opinion

Opinion

Scott, J.

FACTS

Bhamre is a principal attorney of Self & Bhamre, a firm that represented Moza in an employment matter. The firm sued Moza in January 2021 for unpaid fees. Before the firm served the summons and complaint, Bhamre learned in July 2021 that Moza lived and worked at an address on Ebb Tide Circle in Newport Beach. The firm attempted to personally serve Moza at the address more than 10 times—once, the door was answered by an occupant who said it was “hard to know” when Moza would be home. Nonetheless, the firm obtained an April 2022 order authorizing 1 service by publication. (Code Civ. Proc., § 415.50.) In the firm’s application, Bhamre acknowledged the firm’s knowledge of Moza’s Newport Beach address and its efforts to personally serve him there. But Bhamre did not state whether the firm had attempted substitute service or service by mail with notice and acknowledgement. The trial court entered default judgment against Moza in February 2023. The firm mailed a copy of the judgment to Moza at the Newport Beach address. The trial court denied Moza’s motion to set aside the default judgment on September 29, 2023, rejecting his claims of excusable neglect

1 All statutory references…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.