Tliche

Tliche v. Van Quathem

Good Law
1998 Cal. App. LEXIS 795·66 Cal. App. 4th 1054·78 Cal. Rptr. 2d 458·98 Daily Journal DAR 10193·98 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 7369
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaSeptember 22, 1998No. B112529California3,808 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Aldrich, J.

Introduction

This appeal raises the issue of the trial court’s authority and obligations regarding dismissal of a complaint for violation of local fast track rules. Plaintiff and appellant Samy Tliche doing business as Pirata Restaurant (Tliche) appeals from the order of dismissal of his complaint against defendants and respondent Carl Van Quathem, VQA Property Management, and Alca Properties (collectively Van Quathem).

Tliche contends the trial court erred in dismissing his complaint for violation of a local delay reduction rule requiring service of the summons and complaint on defendant within 60 days of filing the complaint and in denying his motion to vacate the order of dismissal.

We find the trial court failed to consider less drastic measures than dismissal as the first sanction (Gov. Code, § 68608, subd. (b)). Also, the trial court failed to take into account that service of process is ordinarily within the power of counsel as opposed to the client; therefore, in the absence of any information to the contrary, the sanction for failure to serve the complaint within the time period specified by the local delay reduction rule should, in the first instance, be…

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.