Defendants’ motion to quash is DENIED.
On May 5, 2020, Plaintiffs Charles Company Inc., Corsair LLC, Gran Plaza LP, and Excel Property Management brought the instant professional negligence suit against Defendants Bryan Cave LLP, Bryan Cave Leighton Paisner LLP, Hall Mark Mersel, Richard C. Ochoa, Rosario L. Vizzie, and Alfred Shaumayan. The Complaint states a single cause of action for professional negligence.
On November 3, 2020, Defendants filed a motion to quash service of summons as untimely. On November 13, 2020, Plaintiffs filed an opposition. On November 19, 2020, Defendants filed a reply.
Legal Standard
Pursuant to CCP section 418.10(a)(1), a defendant may move to quash service of summons on or before the last day to plead in response to the complaint or within such further time as the court may allow for good cause.
“When a motion to quash is properly brought, the burden of proof is placed upon the plaintiff to establish the facts of jurisdiction by a preponderance of th
Hearing Date
November 30, 2020
Type
Legal Malpractice (General Jurisdiction)
For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.
Defendants’ motion to quash is DENIED.
On May 5, 2020, Plaintiffs Charles Company Inc., Corsair LLC, Gran Plaza LP, and Excel Property Management brought the instant professional negligence suit against Defendants Bryan Cave LLP, Bryan Cave Leighton Paisner LLP, Hall Mark Mersel, Richard C. Ochoa, Rosario L. Vizzie, and Alfred Shaumayan. The Complaint states a single cause of action for professional negligence.
On November 3, 2020, Defendants filed a motion to quash service of summons as untimely. On November 13, 2020, Plaintiffs filed an opposition. On November 19, 2020, Defendants filed a reply.
Legal Standard
Pursuant to CCP section 418.10(a)(1), a defendant may move to quash service of summons on or before the last day to plead in response to the complaint or within such further time as the court may allow for good cause.
“When a motion to quash is properly brought, the burden of proof is placed upon the plaintiff to establish the facts of jurisdiction by a preponderance of th