Earnix International Trading v. Zhang CA2/4
Opinion
Opinion
Currey, J.
INTRODUCTION
Plaintiff and Respondent Earnix International Trading Inc. (Earnix) invested in defendant and appellant Kevin Zhang’s real estate project. Earnix later filed a complaint against Zhang for fraud, breach of fiduciary duty, and other related claims.1 After the clerk entered default judgment, Zhang moved to vacate the judgment and quash service of the summons, claiming he was never personally served. The trial court denied Zhang’s motion, his subsequent motion for reconsideration, and his motion to set aside/vacate default. Zhang timely appealed.2 Because the trial court’s order denying Zhang’s motion to quash and vacate the default judgment was supported by substantial evidence, we affirm.
BACKGROUND
Earnix filed a request for entry of default judgment on June 5, 2020, based on a June 4, 2020 proof of service in which an unregistered process server, Michael Patini, swore he personally served Zhang on April 29, 2020, and Zhang’s failure to respond to the complaint. The request was rejected by the clerk on June 11, 2020 because the proof of service form used by Patini was not the correct form for proof of service of a summons and complaint.