arrow left
arrow right
  • Wells Fargo bank, NA vs Pablo Arevalo(09): Limited Rule 3.740 Coll $10,000.00-$24,999.99 document preview
  • Wells Fargo bank, NA vs Pablo Arevalo(09): Limited Rule 3.740 Coll $10,000.00-$24,999.99 document preview
						
                                

Preview

Superior Court of California, County of Merced MINUTE ORDERS Wells Fargo bank, NA 10:00 AM - 12:00 PM vs Motion Pablo Arevalo 18CV-01622 Date of Hearing: 12/02/2020 Heard By: Foster, David Location: Courtroom 9 Courtroom Reporter: Electronic Recording Courtroom Clerk: S. Ontiveros Court Interpreter: Court Investigator: Parties Present: Future Hearings: Exhibits: The case is regularly called for hearing: The Court has read and considered the: Motion to quash service of summons and vacate default judgment. The Court states its tentative ruling The Court finds there was no request for oral argument made The Court orders: The tentative ruling is confirmed by the Court as follows: Defendant Pablo Arevalo's motion to quash service of summons pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 418.10 is DROPPED from calendar due to insufficient notice. Defendant did not provide sufficient notice of the motion to plaintiff. Absent an order shortening time, a motion to quash service of summons must be filed and served a minimum of 16 court days before the hearing date. (Code Civ. Proc., 1005, subd. (a)(4),(b).) In this case, the proof of service indicates notice was served by mail on November10, 2020, less than 16 court days plus 5 calendar days before the scheduled hearing date. Plaintiff has not filed any written opposition waiving this notice defect. Although due to insufficient notice the Court does not reach the merits of the motion, the Court questions whether the motion is timely as a matter of law. A motion to quash under section 418.10 must be brought on or before the last day of [defendant's] time to plead or within any further time that the court may for good cause allow. (Code Civ. Proc., 418.10, subd. (a).) In this case, plaintiff filed a proof of service indicating personal service of summons on defendant on April 10, 2020. Based on the proof of service, defendant's last day to plead was on or about May 11, 2020. On August 28, 2020, defendant's default was entered. Defendant does not cite any legal authority that a motion to quash service of summons may be brought after entry of default judgment. The Court notes that defendant's motion does not cite any legal authority for vacating the default judgment other than section 418.10. Printed: 12/2/2020 12/02/2020 Motion - 18CV-01622 Page 1 of 1