Lebel

Lebel v. Mai

Good Law
148 Cal. Rptr. 3d 892·2012 Cal. App. LEXIS 1155·210 Cal. App. 4th 1154·2012 WL 5396221
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaNovember 6, 2012No. B240914California3,668 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Grimes, J.

The sole question on appeal is whether the trial court erred in granting defendant and respondent Eric Mai’s motion to quash service of process. Plaintiff and appellant Laura Lebel contends the court erred in finding the substituted service on defendant’s mother in California was inadequate to effectuate valid service on defendant, a resident of England. We conclude the trial court did not err in quashing service, and therefore affirm the order.

BACKGROUND

We summarize only those facts pertinent to the narrow issue presented on appeal. In February 2010, plaintiff entered into a residential lease agreement with defendant for the rental of a condominium in Santa Monica, California. At some point during her tenancy, plaintiff became dissatisfied with the tenancy, moved out, and filed this action. In October 2011, plaintiff filed her *1158 operative first amended complaint naming defendant in causes of action for constructive eviction and fraud.

Plaintiff thereafter tried to serve defendant at a residential address in Granada Hills, California. The address had been provided by defendant to plaintiff as the mailing address where she could remit her monthly rental payments.…

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.