ViaView

—Plaintiff and respondent ViaView, Inc. (hereafter ViaView), filed a petition for a workplace violence restraining order (Code Civ. Proc., § 527.8) against defendant and appellant Thomas Retzlaff. Retzlaff, a resident of Texas, filed a motion to quash the petition for lack of personal jurisdiction. He also filed other motions, either concurrently with or after he filed the motion to quash. The trial court concluded that Retzlaff had made a general appearance since he had participated in the litigation beyond filing the motion to quash. On that basis, it denied the motion to quash.

We conclude the trial court erred when it denied the motion to quash. The motion should have been granted because under section 418.10, subdivision (e), a party who moves to quash may—concurrently with or after filing a motion to quash—participate in the litigation and “no act” by the party constitutes an appearance unless and until the proceedings on the motion to quash are finally decided adversely to that party. (§ 418.10, subd. (e); see Air Machine Com SRL v. Superior Court (2010) 186 Cal.App.4th 414, 425-427 [ 112 Cal.Rptr.3d 482 ] (Air Machine).) We will therefore grant writ relief,…