On May 27, 2020 a
Motion-Secondary
was filed
involving a dispute between
Adame Flores, Ricardo,
Bargas, Veronica Ramirez,
Ramirez Bargas, Veronica,
and
Aguirre, Ariadnne J. Arriola Robles,
Arriola-Hernandez, Enrique,
Arriola Robles Aguirre, Ariadnne J.,
Cadena, Ruben Valdovinos,
Four Seasons Contracting,
Valdovinos, Javier,
for 23 Unlimited - Other PI/PD/WD
in the District Court of Fresno County.
Preview
A Larry H. Shapazian — SBN#120197
E-FILED
TOMASSIAN, PIMENTEL & SHAPAZIAN 12/23/2020 12:37 PM
A PROFESSIONAL LAW PARTNERSHIP Superior Court of California
3419 W, Shaw Avenue County of Fresno
Fresno, California93711
By: A. Rodriguez, Deputy
(559) 277-7300 I FAX (559) 277-7350
Attorneys for Defendant FOUR SEASONS CONTRACTING, A California Limited Liability
Company and for defendant ARIADNNE J. ARRIOLA ROBLES AGUIRRE by way of Special
Appearance
O(OWVODU‘l-fiwN
SUPERIOR COURT 0F THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
FOR THE COUNTY OF FRESNO
RICARDO ADAME FLORES; VERONICA ) Case No. 20 CE CG 01543
RAMIREZ BARGAS, )
)
Plaintiffs, ) MEMORANDUM 0F POINTS AND
) AUTHORITIES IN SUPPORT 0F
v. ) SECOND MOTION T0 QUASH
) SERVICE OF SUMMONS FOR
ARIADNNE J. ARRIOLA ROBLES ) LACK OF PERSONAL
AGUIRRE; individually; FOUR SEASONS ) JURISDICTION (DEFECTIVE
CONTRACTING, a California Limited Liability ) SERVICE)
Company; and DOES 1 through 35, inclusive )
)
Defendants. ) DATE: March 11, 2021
) TIME: 3:30 p.m.
DEPT.: 502
JUDGE: Hon. Rosemary McGuire
TRIAL DATE: None
Unlimited Civil Case
I.
INTRODUCTION.
As set forth in the first Motion to Quash, this lawsuit pertains to a September 2, 2019
traffic accident in Fresno, California.
Plaintiffs RICARDO ADAME FLORES and VERONICA RAMIREZ BARGAS filed a
Complaint in this action on May 27, 2020. In the Complaint, the plaintiffs named ARIADNNE
J. ARRIOLA ROBLES AGUIRRE as a defendant.
Memo of Points & Authorities
inSupp on'” Mtnm Quash 1
Furthermore, according to counsel for plaintiffs RICARDO ADAME FLORES and
VERONICA RAMIREZ BARGAS served defendant ARIADNNE J. ARRIOLA ROBLES
AGUIRRE with the Summons and Complaint sometime after November 6, 2020 [See
Declaration 0f Larry H. Shapazian in Support of Sec_0nd Motion to Quash Service 0f Summons
for
OWVQOAQNA
Lack 0f Personal Jurisdiction (Defective Service) filed with this motion and incorporated
herein].
As background information, defendant submits the following: At the November 18, 2020
Case Management Conference, Mr. Jamil Kassimali 0f the Khorshidi Law Firm, APC and the
plaintiffs’ attorneys in this action had informed the Fresno County Superior Court that the
plaintiffs had served defendant Ariadnne J. Arriola Robles Aguirre with the Summons and
Complaint in this matter. At the time, a Motion to Quash was on calendar with the court.
SHAPAZIAN
Nevertheless, defendant Ariadnne J. Arriola Robles Aguin‘e’s counsel checked the Fresno
Avenue
277-7300
& 93711 County Superior Court records to see if the plaintiffs had served defendant Ariadnne J. Arriola
Shaw
CA (559) Robles Aguirre. Additionally, defendant Ariadnne J. Arriola Robles Aguirre’s counsel was
PIMENTEL
West
Fresno,
aware that another defendant in this case had been allegedly served Via Substituted Service on
Telephone
3419 November 13, 2020. Based on defendant Ariadnne J. Arriola Robles Aguirre’s counsel’s review
TOMASSIAN,
of the Fresno Superior Court records in this case, there was no additional Proof 0f Service 0n file
pertaining to defendant Ariadnne J. Arriola Robles Aguirre as of December 16, 2020 [See
Declaration 0f Larry H.
NNNNNNNNNAAAJAAAAAA
mVOVU‘l-bQJNAOCDmeU‘l-bOON—AO
Shapazian in Support 0f 53m Motion to Quash Service of Summons
for Lack of Personal Jurisdiction (Defective Service)].
Nevertheless, when defendant Ariadnne J.Arriola Robles Aguirre’s counsel spoke
Mr. Jamil Kassimali 0f the Khorshidi Law Firm, APC, the attorneys for plaintiffs Ricardo Adame
Flores and Veronica Ramirez Bargas, on December 17, 2020, he specifically inquired about
whether the plaintiffs had served defendant Ariadnne J. Arriola Robles Aguirre again with the
Summons and Complaint. Mr. Kassimali indicated that the plaintiffs had done so subsequent t0
the filing 0f the Motion to Quash [See Declaration 0f Larry H. Shapazian in Support of §eco_nd
Motion to Quash Service of Summons for Lack of Personal Jurisdiction (Defective Service)].
///
Memo of Points & Authorities
inSupp of 2““ Mtn
toQuash 2
On December 18, 2020, defendant Ariadnne J.Arriola Robles Aguirre’s counsel sent a
letter to Mr. Kassimali regarding the alleged service 0f the Summons and Complaint upon
defendant Ariadnne J. Arriola Robles Aguirre. Since Mr. Kassimali had informed defendant
Ariadnne J. Arriola Robles Aguirre’s counsel that the service took place after the Motion to
Quash had been filed, defendant Ariadnne J. Arriola Robles Aguirre’s counsel asked Mr.
OQOQNOUIAOONA
Kassimali to provide him with information pertaining to the date and time when defendant
Ariadnne J. Arriola Robles Aguirre was served; the location of where she was served; and, how
she was served (Le. substituted service). Defendant Ariadnne J.Arriola Robles Aguirre’s
counsel also asked Mr. Kassimali to provide him with the Proof 0f Service and the information
requested by December 21, 2020. [See Exhibit “2” attached t0 the Declaration 0f Larry H.
Shapazian in Support of Seflg Motion to Quash Service of Summons for Lack of Personal
SHAPAZIAN
Jurisdiction (Defective Service)].
Avenue
277-7300
& 93711 On December 21 ,2020, defendant Ariadnne J. Arriola Robles Aguirre’s counsel did not
Shaw
CA (559) hear from Mr. Kassimali.
PIMENTEL
West
Fresno,
On December 22, 2020, when defendant Ariadnne J. Arriola Robles Aguirre’s counsel
Telephone
3419 checked with the Fresno County Superior Court, he discovered that a “First Amended Proof 0f
m
TOMASSIAN,
Service 0f Summons” had been filed With the Fresno County Superior Court on December 17,
2020 [See Exhibit “1” attached to the Declaration of Larry H. Shapazian in Support of
mN®m#wN—\O©QNO§U'I¥OJN—¥
Motion t0 Quash Service 0f Summons for Lack 0f Personal Jurisdiction (Defective Service)].
NNNMNNNNNAAAJAA—xgég
(Note: the Fresno County Superior Court has indicated that this “First Amended Proof of Service
0f Summons” constitutes a “DEFECTIVE PROOF”). Additionally, the “First Amended Proof 0f
Service of Summons” only sets forth that the following documents allegedly were served:
Amendment t0 Complaint (Fictitious Defendant); Statement 0f Damages (Enrique Arriola—
Hernandez /Ricardo Adame Flores); Statement of Damages (Enrique Arriola- Hernandez/
Veronica Ramirez Bargas).
///
///
///
Memo 0f Points & Supp of 2"“ Mtn
Authorities in toQuash 3
Subsequently, 0n December 22, 2020, defendant Ariadnne J. Arriola Robles Aguirre’s
counsel immediately sent Mr. Kassimali a letter advising him of his December 18, 2020 letter;
mentioning that defendant Ariadnne J. Arriola Robles Aguirre’s counsel had not heard from
him; and advising him that defendant Ariadnne J. Arriola Robles Aguirre’s counsel had located
a Proof of Service that had been filed 0n December
(omflmcn-hQJNA
17, 2020. In addition, defendant Axiadnne J.
Arriola Robles Aguirre’s counsel asked Mr. Kassimali if he still was contending that he had
served defendant Ariadnne J. Arriola Robles Aguirre Via Substituted Service on November 13,
2020 and t0 advise him by 3:00 pm. on December 22, 2020. [See Exhibit “3” attached t0 the
Declaration 0f Larry H. Shapazian in Support 0f m1 Motion t0 Quash Service 0f Summons
for Lack 0f Personal Jurisdiction (Defective Service)]
Since defendant Ariadnne J. Arriola Robles Aguirre’s counsel had not heard back from
SHAPAZIAN
O
o the plaintiffs’ attorneys and it appears that they are taking the position that they allegedly served
g 0')
c
mF’T
& >\-|~ defendant Ariadnne Arriola Robles Aguirre via Substituted Service on November 2020
Preview
A Larry H. Shapazian — SBN#120197 E-FILED TOMASSIAN, PIMENTEL & SHAPAZIAN 12/23/2020 12:37 PM A PROFESSIONAL LAW PARTNERSHIP Superior Court of California 3419 W, Shaw Avenue County of Fresno Fresno, California93711 By: A. Rodriguez, Deputy (559) 277-7300 I FAX (559) 277-7350 Attorneys for Defendant FOUR SEASONS CONTRACTING, A California Limited Liability Company and for defendant ARIADNNE J. ARRIOLA ROBLES AGUIRRE by way of Special Appearance O(OWVODU‘l-fiwN SUPERIOR COURT 0F THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOR THE COUNTY OF FRESNO RICARDO ADAME FLORES; VERONICA ) Case No. 20 CE CG 01543 RAMIREZ BARGAS, ) ) Plaintiffs, ) MEMORANDUM 0F POINTS AND ) AUTHORITIES IN SUPPORT 0F v. ) SECOND MOTION T0 QUASH ) SERVICE OF SUMMONS FOR ARIADNNE J. ARRIOLA ROBLES ) LACK OF PERSONAL AGUIRRE; individually; FOUR SEASONS ) JURISDICTION (DEFECTIVE CONTRACTING, a California Limited Liability ) SERVICE) Company; and DOES 1 through 35, inclusive ) ) Defendants. ) DATE: March 11, 2021 ) TIME: 3:30 p.m. DEPT.: 502 JUDGE: Hon. Rosemary McGuire TRIAL DATE: None Unlimited Civil Case I. INTRODUCTION. As set forth in the first Motion to Quash, this lawsuit pertains to a September 2, 2019 traffic accident in Fresno, California. Plaintiffs RICARDO ADAME FLORES and VERONICA RAMIREZ BARGAS filed a Complaint in this action on May 27, 2020. In the Complaint, the plaintiffs named ARIADNNE J. ARRIOLA ROBLES AGUIRRE as a defendant. Memo of Points & Authorities inSupp on'” Mtnm Quash 1 Furthermore, according to counsel for plaintiffs RICARDO ADAME FLORES and VERONICA RAMIREZ BARGAS served defendant ARIADNNE J. ARRIOLA ROBLES AGUIRRE with the Summons and Complaint sometime after November 6, 2020 [See Declaration 0f Larry H. Shapazian in Support of Sec_0nd Motion to Quash Service 0f Summons for OWVQOAQNA Lack 0f Personal Jurisdiction (Defective Service) filed with this motion and incorporated herein]. As background information, defendant submits the following: At the November 18, 2020 Case Management Conference, Mr. Jamil Kassimali 0f the Khorshidi Law Firm, APC and the plaintiffs’ attorneys in this action had informed the Fresno County Superior Court that the plaintiffs had served defendant Ariadnne J. Arriola Robles Aguirre with the Summons and Complaint in this matter. At the time, a Motion to Quash was on calendar with the court. SHAPAZIAN Nevertheless, defendant Ariadnne J. Arriola Robles Aguin‘e’s counsel checked the Fresno Avenue 277-7300 & 93711 County Superior Court records to see if the plaintiffs had served defendant Ariadnne J. Arriola Shaw CA (559) Robles Aguirre. Additionally, defendant Ariadnne J. Arriola Robles Aguirre’s counsel was PIMENTEL West Fresno, aware that another defendant in this case had been allegedly served Via Substituted Service on Telephone 3419 November 13, 2020. Based on defendant Ariadnne J. Arriola Robles Aguirre’s counsel’s review TOMASSIAN, of the Fresno Superior Court records in this case, there was no additional Proof 0f Service 0n file pertaining to defendant Ariadnne J. Arriola Robles Aguirre as of December 16, 2020 [See Declaration 0f Larry H. NNNNNNNNNAAAJAAAAAA mVOVU‘l-bQJNAOCDmeU‘l-bOON—AO Shapazian in Support 0f 53m Motion to Quash Service of Summons for Lack of Personal Jurisdiction (Defective Service)]. Nevertheless, when defendant Ariadnne J.Arriola Robles Aguirre’s counsel spoke Mr. Jamil Kassimali 0f the Khorshidi Law Firm, APC, the attorneys for plaintiffs Ricardo Adame Flores and Veronica Ramirez Bargas, on December 17, 2020, he specifically inquired about whether the plaintiffs had served defendant Ariadnne J. Arriola Robles Aguirre again with the Summons and Complaint. Mr. Kassimali indicated that the plaintiffs had done so subsequent t0 the filing 0f the Motion to Quash [See Declaration 0f Larry H. Shapazian in Support of §eco_nd Motion to Quash Service of Summons for Lack of Personal Jurisdiction (Defective Service)]. /// Memo of Points & Authorities inSupp of 2““ Mtn toQuash 2 On December 18, 2020, defendant Ariadnne J.Arriola Robles Aguirre’s counsel sent a letter to Mr. Kassimali regarding the alleged service 0f the Summons and Complaint upon defendant Ariadnne J. Arriola Robles Aguirre. Since Mr. Kassimali had informed defendant Ariadnne J. Arriola Robles Aguirre’s counsel that the service took place after the Motion to Quash had been filed, defendant Ariadnne J. Arriola Robles Aguirre’s counsel asked Mr. OQOQNOUIAOONA Kassimali to provide him with information pertaining to the date and time when defendant Ariadnne J. Arriola Robles Aguirre was served; the location of where she was served; and, how she was served (Le. substituted service). Defendant Ariadnne J.Arriola Robles Aguirre’s counsel also asked Mr. Kassimali to provide him with the Proof 0f Service and the information requested by December 21, 2020. [See Exhibit “2” attached t0 the Declaration 0f Larry H. Shapazian in Support of Seflg Motion to Quash Service of Summons for Lack of Personal SHAPAZIAN Jurisdiction (Defective Service)]. Avenue 277-7300 & 93711 On December 21 ,2020, defendant Ariadnne J. Arriola Robles Aguirre’s counsel did not Shaw CA (559) hear from Mr. Kassimali. PIMENTEL West Fresno, On December 22, 2020, when defendant Ariadnne J. Arriola Robles Aguirre’s counsel Telephone 3419 checked with the Fresno County Superior Court, he discovered that a “First Amended Proof 0f m TOMASSIAN, Service 0f Summons” had been filed With the Fresno County Superior Court on December 17, 2020 [See Exhibit “1” attached to the Declaration of Larry H. Shapazian in Support of mN®m#wN—\O©QNO§U'I¥OJN—¥ Motion t0 Quash Service 0f Summons for Lack 0f Personal Jurisdiction (Defective Service)]. NNNMNNNNNAAAJAA—xgég (Note: the Fresno County Superior Court has indicated that this “First Amended Proof of Service 0f Summons” constitutes a “DEFECTIVE PROOF”). Additionally, the “First Amended Proof 0f Service of Summons” only sets forth that the following documents allegedly were served: Amendment t0 Complaint (Fictitious Defendant); Statement 0f Damages (Enrique Arriola— Hernandez /Ricardo Adame Flores); Statement of Damages (Enrique Arriola- Hernandez/ Veronica Ramirez Bargas). /// /// /// Memo 0f Points & Supp of 2"“ Mtn Authorities in toQuash 3 Subsequently, 0n December 22, 2020, defendant Ariadnne J. Arriola Robles Aguirre’s counsel immediately sent Mr. Kassimali a letter advising him of his December 18, 2020 letter; mentioning that defendant Ariadnne J. Arriola Robles Aguirre’s counsel had not heard from him; and advising him that defendant Ariadnne J. Arriola Robles Aguirre’s counsel had located a Proof of Service that had been filed 0n December (omflmcn-hQJNA 17, 2020. In addition, defendant Axiadnne J. Arriola Robles Aguirre’s counsel asked Mr. Kassimali if he still was contending that he had served defendant Ariadnne J. Arriola Robles Aguirre Via Substituted Service on November 13, 2020 and t0 advise him by 3:00 pm. on December 22, 2020. [See Exhibit “3” attached t0 the Declaration 0f Larry H. Shapazian in Support 0f m1 Motion t0 Quash Service 0f Summons for Lack 0f Personal Jurisdiction (Defective Service)] Since defendant Ariadnne J. Arriola Robles Aguirre’s counsel had not heard back from SHAPAZIAN O o the plaintiffs’ attorneys and it appears that they are taking the position that they allegedly served g 0') c mF’T & >\-|~ defendant Ariadnne Arriola Robles Aguirre via Substituted Service on November 2020