Khourie, Crew & Jaeger v. Sabek, Inc.

Good Law
1990 Cal. App. LEXIS 558·220 Cal. App. 3d 1009·269 Cal. Rptr. 687
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMay 24, 1990A046239California1,902 words

Opinion

Opinion

Stein, J.

Can a corporation attempt to avoid service of process by refusing to unlock its door, permit default to be entered against it and then successfully complain on appeal that the trial court abused its discretion in refusing to set aside the resulting judgment? We find that it cannot and affirm the order denying relief from default.

Sabek, Inc., Andy Saben, and V.T. Petroleum, Inc. (hereafter Sabek) appeal from the order of the superior court denying Sabek’s motion to set aside a judgment after default taken against it by Khourie, Crew & Jaeger (hereafter Khourie) for legal services rendered.

Sabek moved to set aside the default on the grounds that it was never properly served with Khourie’s summons and complaint and/or that it reasonably failed to respond to the notice that Khourie intended to take its default because Sabek’s principal, Andy Saberi, was reasonably mistaken in believing that service was not effective.

Facts

On December 1, 1989, Murray Woods, a process server, went to Sabek’s place of business at approximately 4:30 in the afternoon in order to serve its agent, Saberi, with Khourie’s summons and complaint. Sabek’s door was locked. A woman responded when…

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.