Thompson, Welch, Soroko & Gilbert v. Jones CA1/3

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaDecember 29, 2021A160332California1,999 words

Opinion

Opinion

Petrou, J.

BACKGROUND

Jones hired the Thompson, Welch, Soroko & Gilbert LLP law firm (Thompson) to represent his company in litigation and signed a personal guaranty on his company’s behalf. Thompson performed the legal work, but Jones did not pay for it. In email correspondence and telephone conversations with Jones, Thompson tried — without success — to resolve the fee dispute.

Undesignated statutory references are to the Code of Civil Procedure.

1 In June 2018, Thompson filed a verified complaint against Jones alleging claims for breach of written guaranty and quantum meruit. Thompson emailed Jones a courtesy copy of the file-endorsed complaint later that month. Thompson tried, numerous times, to personally serve Jones with the summons and complaint. Those attempts were unsuccessful. In August — and pursuant to a trial court order — Thompson served the summons by publication; it later served Jones with notice of entry of the order authorizing service by publication, and with proof of publication, by mail. Service was deemed complete in September. Jones did not file a responsive pleading. In late October 2018, the trial court entered Jones’s default. About a week later, Jones moved…

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.