California statutory law provides that in certain cases, when a party cannot be located, alternative service of process may be completed via publication of a summons. Specifically, "the court in which the action is pending may direct that summons be served in a manner which is reasonably calculated to give actual notice to the party to be served and that proof of such service be made as prescribed by the court." (Cal. Code of Civ. Pro. §413.30.)
“A summons may be served by publication if upon affidavit it appears to the satisfaction of the court in which the action is pending that the party to be served cannot with reasonable diligence be served in another manner specified in this article and that …: [¶] (1) A cause of action exists against the party upon whom service is to be made or he or she is a necessary or proper party to the action.” (Code Civ. Proc. § 415.50(a)(1).)
“Constitutional due process requirements are satisfied where the form of service provided and employed is reasonably calculated to give a litigant actual notice of the proceedings and an opportunity to be heard.” (Crescendo Corp. v. Shelted, Inc. (1968) 267 Cal.App.2d 209, 213).)
The court may authorize summons served by publication if:
Code of Civil Procedure § 872.320 sets forth three conditions to which an order is subject: posting 10 days after the order, recording a notice of pendency of action, and details of the publication.
Code of Civil Procedure § 415.50(b) provides:
"The court shall order the summons to be published in a named newspaper, published in this state, that is most likely to give actual notice to the party to be served. … The order shall direct that a copy of the summons, the complaint, and the order for publication be forthwith mailed to the party if his or her address is ascertained before expiration of the time prescribed for publication of the summons. Except as otherwise provided by statute, the publication shall be made as provided by Section 6064 of the Government Code unless the court, in its discretion, orders publication for a longer period."
If the address of the party to be served is ascertained before the publication time has expired, a copy of the summons, the complaint, and the order for publication must be immediately mailed to the party to be served. (California CCP §415.50(b).)
The Period of Publication begins on the day the Summons is published, and ends 28 days later (including the publication date). Unless the Court in its discretion extends the publication period, notice must be published either:
(CCP §§ 415.10 - 415.95 ("Manner of Service of Summons").)
The first requirement for an order permitting service by publication is a showing that the party cannot be served with reasonable diligence by another method of service. Service by publication is to be “utilized only as a last resort.” (Watts v. Crawford (1995) 10 Cal.4th 743, 749 fn. 5.) Service by mail must be attempted prior to filing an application for order for publication. (Transamerica Title Ins. Co. v. Hendrix (1995) 34 Cal.App.4th 740, 746.) “‘… The term “reasonable diligence” … denotes a thorough, systematic investigation and inquiry conducted in good faith by the party or his agent or attorney. A number of honest attempts to learn defendant’s whereabouts or his address by inquiry of relatives, … and by investigation of appropriate city and telephone directories, [voter registries, and assessor’s office property indices situated near the defendant’s last known location], generally are sufficient. These are the likely sources of information, and consequently must be searched before resorting to service by publication.’ [Citations.] ‘Before allowing a plaintiff to resort to service by publication, the courts necessarily require him to show exhaustive attempts to locate the defendant, for it is generally recognized that service by publication rarely results in actual notice.’” (Watts v. Crawford (1995) 10 Cal.4th 743, 749, fn. 5 (internal citations omitted).) “It is well established that the affidavit submitted under section 415.50 must establish reasonable diligence by ‘probative facts’ based on personal knowledge.” (Olvera v. Olvera (1991) 232 Cal.App.3d 32, 42.)
Under Code of Civil Procedure section 473(d), “[t]he court may, .... on motion of either party after notice to the other party, set aside any void judgment or order.” When service of the Summons and Complaint is by publication, the judgment may be deemed facially invalid if the affidavit in support of service by publication failed to show reasonable diligence: An order for publication of summons, based solely upon a finding that the defendant ‘cannot after due diligence be found within this state,’ is void when the affidavit which constituted the evidence in support of that finding does not contain any evidence tending to prove any diligent effort to find the defendant.
The second requirement for an order permitting service by publication is that a “cause of action exists against the party upon whom service is to be made or he or she is a necessary or proper party to the action.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 415.50, subd. (a)(1).)
All statutory requirements must be contained in declaration(s) submitted by those with personal knowledge of the facts, meaning that while the reasonable diligence requirement may be shown by counsel, the other jurisdictional requirements are established by the moving party itself (and is often outlined in a separate declaration). (Weil & Brown, Civ. Proc. Before Trial (The Rutter Group 2018), ¶ 4.263, p. 4-46.) These showings are jurisdictional prerequisites to the issuance of an order for publication. (Olvera v. Olvera (1991) 232 Cal.App.3d 32, 42, fn. 9.) The moving party’s attorney can execute the declaration about the requirements outlined in section 450.50, subdivision (a)(1) or (2) only if he or she has the requisite personal knowledge of the facts in support. (Harris v. Cavasso (1977) 68 Cal.App.3d 723, 626 (verification by plaintiff’s counsel on information and belief not sufficient as a sworn statement of facts for publication of summons).)
International service of process must comport with the Hague Convention regarding service on an individual in a foreign country, or a proper basis for why the Hague Convention did not apply. (Volkswagenwerk Aktiengesellschaft v. Schlunk (1988) 486 U.S. 694, 108 S.Ct. 2104, 100 L.Ed.2d 722 (Schlunk ); Code Civ. Proc. § 413.10(c); Floveyor Internat., Ltd. v. Superior Court (1997) 59 Cal.App.4th 789, 794, 69 Cal.Rptr.2d 457; Kott v. Superior Court (1996) 45 Cal.App.4th 1126, 1133, 53 Cal.Rptr.2d 215 (Hague Convention "preempts inconsistent methods of service prescribed by state law in all cases to which it applies").)
(CCP § 415.50(a), (b).) Cross-Complainant obtained an Order for Publication on February 24, 2020, and filed proof of publication on July 10, 2020, showing publication of the First Amended Cross-Complaint Summons, as well as Statement of Damages, properly for four subsequent weeks on 04/15/2020, 04/22/2020, 04/30/2020, and 05/06/2020. (CCP § 415.50(c); Govt. Code § 6064.) Cross-Complainant then filed proof of service of the Summons and Statement of Damages on August 19, 2020.
Jan 15, 2021
Real Property
Quiet Title
Los Angeles County, CA
Here, there is no showing that the associations appeared (they were defaulted), and the People have not yet shown service compliant with §416.40, or 415.50. The Southside Chiques and Colonia Chiques are unincorporated associations under Corp. Code §18220. There is no evidence that service of the Motions have been effected on the unincorporated associations, or any individual bound by Injunctions. In People ex rel. Reisig v.
Jan 12, 2021
Insurance
Intellectual Property
Ventura County, CA
Here, there is no showing that the associations appeared (they were defaulted), and the People have not yet shown service compliant with §416.40, or 415.50. The Southside Chiques and Colonia Chiques are unincorporated associations under Corp. Code §18220. There is no evidence that service of the Motions have been effected on the unincorporated associations, or any individual bound by Injunctions. In People ex rel. Reisig v.
Jan 12, 2021
Insurance
Intellectual Property
Ventura County, CA
On 11/6/19, Plaintiff filed an Order for Publication that was rejected on that same date. To date, Plaintiff has not filed proof of service of summons and complaint on Defendant. On 2/26/20, the held an Order to Show Cause (“OSC”) Re: Dismissal for Failure to Serve and Failure to File Proof of Service and OSC Re: Dismissal for Failure to Enter Default.
Jan 08, 2021
Los Angeles County, CA
(See Code of Civil Procedure, §§ 415.10-415.50.) Service of summons is a jurisdictional requirement, 1This Department intends to comply with the time requirements of the Trial Court Delay Reduction Act (Government Code, §§ 68600–68620). The California Rules of Court state that the goal of each trial court should be to manage limited and unlimited civil cases from filing so that 100 percent are disposed of within 24 months. (Ca. St. Civil Rules of Court, Rule 3.714(b)(1)(C) and (b)(2)(C).
Jan 07, 2021
Santa Clara County, CA
The Court approved Plaintiffs' application to serve process by publication, but Plaintiffs still must comply with C.C.P. sections 415.50, 417.10, 417.30, 763.020 and 763.040. (See also, Judicial Council form POS-010.) The Court acknowledges the exhibits attached to the Declaration of Counsel, purporting that publication notices were published, but Plaintiffs are required to adhere to the above-mentioned code sections and file a proof of service of summons.
Jan 07, 2021
Real Property
other
San Diego County, CA
On September 4, 2020, an Order for Publication for Veronika Voss was signed and filed. On October 13, 2020, Petitioner filed a Proof of Publication. Legal Standard Per CCP § 1285, “Any party to an arbitration in which an award has been made may petition the court to confirm, correct or vacate the award. The petition shall name as respondent all parties to the arbitration and may name as respondents any other persons bound by the arbitration award.”
Jan 05, 2021
Los Angeles County, CA
On 11/12/20, Petitioner obtained an Order for Publication allowing it to serve Daniel Vallin and Alida Vallin with the petition by publication in Metropolitan News-Enterprise. Petitioner has not filed evidence that it complied with the order for publication (no evidence of publication in Metropolitan News-Enterprise for four successive weeks). Proof of service was required to be filed at least five court days before the hearing (12/9/20). CRC 3.1300(c).
Dec 16, 2020
Los Angeles County, CA
Upon review of the docket, it appears that the Order for Publication signed and filed on March 9, 2020 also reflects the incorrect name, as it is as to “Azusa Enterprise,” who is not a party to this action. Accordingly, Plaintiff will be required to file another Application for Publication with the correct name of Defendant Azusa Enterprises. Based on the foregoing, Plaintiff’s request for entry of default judgment is DENIED without prejudice.
Dec 03, 2020
Personal Injury/ Tort
Fraud
Los Angeles County, CA
The Court CCP §415.50 permits a Summons to be served by publication; this request should be granted.
Dec 01, 2020
Santa Barbara County, CA
Plaintiff obtained an order for publication of summons in March of 2019, and eventually obtained entry of default judgment in an amount of $180,874.58, on January 15, 2020. ROA # 61, 82. Defendant now moves to set aside or vacate the default judgment. Discussion Lack of notice under CCP § 473.5 CCP section 473.5 is designed to provide relief where proper service (such as by publication) is completed but the defendant nevertheless shows he did not have actual notice in time to defend against it.
Oct 29, 2020
Contract
Breach
San Diego County, CA
Explanation: Where publication is ordered, it is governed by Code of Civil Procedure section 415.50, and is subject to the following conditions: (1) posting, within 10 days after the order is issued, of a copy of the summons in a conspicuous place on the property (2) recordation of a lis pendens; and (3) the publication must include a description of the property by both street address or common designation and legal description, if any. (Code Civ. Proc. § 763.020.)
Oct 27, 2020
Real Property
other
Fresno County, CA
THE COURT’S OCTOBER 7, 2019 ORDER FOR PUBLICATION IS HEREBY STRUCK. ANALYSIS: Plaintiff 416-424 1/2 N. Fairfax Ave., LLC (“Plaintiff”) filed the instant action for breach of lease agreement against Defendants Killion Estate, LLC and Kaner Apelacio (“Defendants”) on December 15, 2017. On July 17, 2018, the Court rejected Plaintiff’s Application for Service by Publication.
Oct 22, 2020
Los Angeles County, CA
The Judicial Council Comments on Code of Civil Procedure section 415.50 state: “The term ‘reasonable diligence’ takes its meaning from the former law: it denotes a thorough, systematic investigation and inquiry conducted in good faith by the party or his agent or attorney.” Those Comments also state “The plaintiff himself need not execute the affidavit. Affidavits of several persons having personal knowledge of the pertinent facts are appropriate under various circumstances.”
Oct 19, 2020
Other
Intellectual Property
Fresno County, CA
The Court notes that on July 15, 2020, Petitioners filed an Order for Publication that was rejected because it was not accompanied by an Application for Service by Publication. (Order for Publication; Notice of Rejection of Electronic Filing, filed 7/15/20.) It appears that Petitioners intended to serve Respondent by publication but have not made any further attempt at service in the last four months.
Oct 14, 2020
Los Angeles County, CA
(see Order for Publication Defendant Edmond Aslan in Metropolitan News filed on 01/9/20.) The Court further ordered “that a copy of said Summons and Complaint in this action be forthwith deposited in the United States Post Office, postage prepaid, directed to said Defendant, if his address is ascertained before expiration of the time prescribed for the publication of this Summons.” (Id.)
Oct 02, 2020
Contract
Breach
Los Angeles County, CA
This service was sufficient under Code of Civil Procedure section 415.50(b) and Government Code section 6064.
Sep 30, 2020
Los Angeles County, CA
Fraud On February 18, 2020, an Order for Publication was filed; On March 24, 2020, a Declaration of Publication was filed. On May 12, 2020, Defendant’s default was entered. A Case Management Conference is set for June 24, 2020. Discussion Plaintiff’s Application for Default Judgment is DENIED without prejudice. The following defects are noted: 1.
Sep 23, 2020
Personal Injury/ Tort
Fraud
Los Angeles County, CA
., § 415.50 (a). Plaintiff BBR Investments LLC’s Motion to Serve Defendant Lily Kids Corporation via service on the Secretary of State is GRANTED. Plaintiff complied with Corp. Code, § 1702 (b).
Sep 14, 2020
Orange County, CA
Substituted service on an individual defendant is authorized when the defendant cannot with reasonable diligence by personally served (CCP §§ 415.20(b), 415.50(e); Burchett v. City of Newport Beach (1995) 33 Cal. App. 4th 1472, 1477-1478).
Sep 09, 2020
Lori Ann Fournier or Olivia Rosales
Los Angeles County, CA
Magpapian in Support of Application for Order for Publication of Summons filed on April 4, 2019 and July 10, 2019, are to be SEALED and Plaintiff is to refile redacted versions of the declarations within ten (10) days of this order.
Sep 03, 2020
Los Angeles County, CA
Plaintiff’s (Agata Ratajczak) Motion for Monetary Award Under CCP 415.50 (Motion), filed on 8-5-20 under ROA No. 58, is DENIED. Code of Civil Procedure section 415.30 states in part, “(a) A summons may be served by mail as provided in this section.
Sep 01, 2020
Orange County, CA
(See CCP § 415.50(a) & (b) [order to allow service by publication requires a showing of reasonable diligence and should order publication in newspaper most likely to give actual notice].) The default entered on September 10, 2018 and default judgment entered on May 2, 2019 are SET ASIDE. Intervenor USAA is ordered to efile with the Court within five days hereof a separate executed copy of its attached Answer in Intervention and to fully comply with CCP § 387(e).
Aug 28, 2020
Other
Intellectual Property
Los Angeles County, CA
(b)); (3) service by mail coupled with a notice and acknowledgment of receipt (§ 415.30); and (4) service by publication (§ 415.50). (See Weil & Brown, Cal. Practice Guide: Civil Procedure Before Trial, supra, ¶¶ 4:180–4:181.) The Proof of Service filed indicates that Dr. Kimber was “personally served”. (ROA 29) However, she testifies that she found a copy of the Summons and Complaint on her desk on 1/13/20. (Kimber M.D. Decl., ¶4.) Dr. Kimber was not personally served with the Summons and Complaint.
Aug 27, 2020
Orange County, CA
(b)); (3) service by mail coupled with a notice and acknowledgment of receipt (§ 415.30); and (4) service by publication (§ 415.50). (See Weil & Brown, Cal. Practice Guide: Civil Procedure Before Trial, supra, ¶¶ 4:180–4:181.)
Aug 21, 2020
Orange County, CA
Please wait a moment while we load this page.