arrow left
arrow right
  • ROBERT ROSS et al VS. C.C. MOORE & CO. ENGINEERS ASBESTOS document preview
  • ROBERT ROSS et al VS. C.C. MOORE & CO. ENGINEERS ASBESTOS document preview
  • ROBERT ROSS et al VS. C.C. MOORE & CO. ENGINEERS ASBESTOS document preview
  • ROBERT ROSS et al VS. C.C. MOORE & CO. ENGINEERS ASBESTOS document preview
						
                                

Preview

BRAYTON@PURCELL LLP ATTORNEYS AT LAW 222 RUSH LANDING ROAD. PO BOX 6169 NOVATO, CALIFORNIA 94948-6559 (415}898-1553 Coe WAH BR WN 10 DAVID R. DONADIO, ESQ., S.B, #154436 NANCY T. WILLIAMS, ESQ., S.B. #201095 BRAYTON®PURCELL LLP ELECTRONICALLY Attorneys at Law 222 Rush Landing Road FILED P.O. Box 6169 Superior Court of California, . . County of San Francisco Novato, California 94948-6169 (445) 898-1555 AUG 24 2011 Tentative Ruling Contest Email: contestasbestosTR@braytonlaw.com Clerk of the Court BY: VANESSA WU Attorneys for Plaintiffs . Deputy Clerk SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO ROBERT ROSS and JEAN ROSS, Plaintiffs, ASBESTOS No. CGC-10-275731 EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR ORDER DIRECTING SERVICE OF SUMMONS ON DEFENDANT SUGDEN ENGINEERING CO., BY DELIVERY OF PROCESS TO SECRETARY OF STATE [C.C.P. § 416.20(b); Corp. Code § 2011(b); Former Corp. Code § 3305] Date: August 25, 2011 Time: 11:00 a.m. Room: 220, Hon. Harold E. Kahn Trial Date: N/A Filing Date: December 17, 2010 Vs C.C. MOORE & CO. ENGINEERS; Defendants as Reflected on Exhibit 1 attached to the Summary Complaint herein; and DOES 1-8500. Ne ee el Application is hereby made for an Order directing that process in the above-entitled action be served on defendant SUGDEN ENGINEERING CO., (hereafter "defendant"), a suspended and/or dissolved corporation, by personally delivering to the California Secretary of State, or to an assistant or deputy Secretary of State, two copies of the Brayton* Purcell LLP Master Complaint, together with two copies of the Order herein requested. L LEGAL ARGUMENT C.C.P. § 416.20 states that a summons may be served on a corporation which has forfeited its charter to do business, suspended, or has been dissolved. Keilnived\ 93s pichaPP-£X PARTE SRV CASOS SUGENG: 1 EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR ORDER DIRECTING SERVICE OF SUMMONS ON DEFENDANTSUODEN ENGINEERING CO, BY DELIVERY OF PROCESS TO SECRETARY OF STATEOm RW AR RB BW NY RR WY NR NN NK KBR He mes Oo WA A BY BH = SG GC oO WA HA BW HR HK SD C.C.P. § 416.20(b), by reference to Corp, Code § 2011, provides that service may be made upon a dissolved corporation by personal delivery to the Secretary of State or to an assistant or deputy Secretary of State of the Summons, Complaint and the Order. Under C.C.P. § 416.20(b) and Corp. Code § 2011(b), this Court may order that Summons or other process be served upon Defendant by personally delivering a copy thereof, together with a copy of the Order, to the Secretary of State or an assistant or deputy Secretary of State. Corp. Code § 2011 became effective January 1, 1977. This Court may still order that service upon Defendant be made by personally delivering a copy thereof fo the Secretary of State pursuant fo the former Corp. Code § 3305. A true and correct copy of the text of former Corp. Code § 3305 is attached to the accompanying request for judicial notice. Former Corp. Code § 3305 states in relevant part: Summons or other process against a corporation dissolved on or after August 14, 1929, may be served by delivering a copy thereof to an officer, director, or other person having charge of its assets, or ifno such person can be found, to any agent upon whom process might be served at the time of dissolution. If none of such persons can be found with due diligence and it is shown to the satisfaction of the court or judge, then the court or judge may make an order that summons or other process be served upon the dissolved corporation by delivering a copy thereof, together with a copy of the order, to the Secretary of State or to an assistant or deputy secretary of state. Under Corp. Code § 2011 and former Corp. Code § 3305 service of summons by delivery of process to the Secretary of State is proper where no person having charge of the assets of a dissolved corporation is found in the exercise of due diligence. As set forth in the accompanying declaration of Monica Lepe, filed herewith, all persons having charge of such assets are now deceased, and plaintiff has not been able to locate any such other person in the exercise of due diligence. (See Declaration of Monica Lepe, filed herewith.) Dated: Z fz Ss, HL ee cy T. janis Attomeys for Plaintiffs KeAtnjured\19349\p/dLAPP-EX PARTE SRV CASOS SUGENG. 2 ig EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR ORDER DIRECTING SERVICE OF SUMMONS ON DEFENDANTSUGDEN ENGINEERING CO., BY DELIVERY OF PROCESS TO SECRETARY OF STATE