On August 27, 2021 a
Request,Application
was filed
involving a dispute between
Us Bank National Association As Trustee For Terwin Mortgage Trust 2004-4Sl Asset-Backed Certificates Series 2004-4Sl,
and
Gary Van Zandt Successor-In-Interest To Ellen Van Zandt,
The Estate Of Ellen Van Zandt,
Zandt Ellen Van,
for Quiet Title (General Jurisdiction)
in the District Court of Los Angeles County.
Preview
SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES
Civil Division
North District, Michael Antonovich Antelope Valley Courthouse, Department A14
21AVCV00677 February 1, 2022
US BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, AS TRUSTEE FOR 2:30 PM
TERWIN MORTGAGE TRUST 2004-4SL, ASSET-BACKED
CERTIFICATES, SERIES 2004-4SL vs ELLEN VAN ZANDT
Judge: Honorable Stephen Morgan CSR: None
Judicial Assistant: D. Dill ERM: None
Courtroom Assistant: None Deputy Sheriff: None
APPEARANCES:
For Plaintiff(s): No Appearances
For Defendant(s): No Appearances
NATURE OF PROCEEDINGS: Non-Appearance Case Review Re: Application for
Publication
Defendant U.S. BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, AS TRUSTEE FOR TERWIN
MORTGAGE TRUST 2004- 4SL, ASSET-BACKED CERTIFICATES, SERIES 2004-4SL's
Application for publication is denied.
CCP § 872.530 reads in relevant part:
If a person described in Section 872.510 is dead and the plaintiff knows of a personal
representative, the plaintiff shall join such personal representative as a defendant.
(CCP § 872.530(a).)
California law recognizes that defendants may attempt to refuse service. Case law recognizes the
sufficiency of attempted delivery in the presence of a defendant who refuses to accept the paper.
Examples include:
(1) In re Application of Ball (1934) 2 Cal.App.2d 578, 578-79 where a process server came
within 12 feet of petitioner, said “I have here another one of those things for you,” tossed paper
toward petitioner, and added “Now you are served" and petitioner refused to pick up the
documents. The Court held “[w]e take it that when men are within easy speaking distance of
each other and facts occur that would convince a reasonable man that personal service of a legal
document is being attempted, service cannot be avoided by denying service and moving away
without consenting to take the document in hand.” (Id. at 579.)
Minute Order Page 1 of 2
Document Filed Date
February 01, 2022
Case Filing Date
August 27, 2021
Category
Quiet Title (General Jurisdiction)
Status
Request for Dismissal - Before Trial not following ADR or more than 60 days since ADR 11/30/2021
For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.
Preview
SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES Civil Division North District, Michael Antonovich Antelope Valley Courthouse, Department A14 21AVCV00677 February 1, 2022 US BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, AS TRUSTEE FOR 2:30 PM TERWIN MORTGAGE TRUST 2004-4SL, ASSET-BACKED CERTIFICATES, SERIES 2004-4SL vs ELLEN VAN ZANDT Judge: Honorable Stephen Morgan CSR: None Judicial Assistant: D. Dill ERM: None Courtroom Assistant: None Deputy Sheriff: None APPEARANCES: For Plaintiff(s): No Appearances For Defendant(s): No Appearances NATURE OF PROCEEDINGS: Non-Appearance Case Review Re: Application for Publication Defendant U.S. BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, AS TRUSTEE FOR TERWIN MORTGAGE TRUST 2004- 4SL, ASSET-BACKED CERTIFICATES, SERIES 2004-4SL's Application for publication is denied. CCP § 872.530 reads in relevant part: If a person described in Section 872.510 is dead and the plaintiff knows of a personal representative, the plaintiff shall join such personal representative as a defendant. (CCP § 872.530(a).) California law recognizes that defendants may attempt to refuse service. Case law recognizes the sufficiency of attempted delivery in the presence of a defendant who refuses to accept the paper. Examples include: (1) In re Application of Ball (1934) 2 Cal.App.2d 578, 578-79 where a process server came within 12 feet of petitioner, said “I have here another one of those things for you,” tossed paper toward petitioner, and added “Now you are served" and petitioner refused to pick up the documents. The Court held “[w]e take it that when men are within easy speaking distance of each other and facts occur that would convince a reasonable man that personal service of a legal document is being attempted, service cannot be avoided by denying service and moving away without consenting to take the document in hand.” (Id. at 579.) Minute Order Page 1 of 2