Tahoe Regional Planning Agency v. Reziapkine

Summary

The United States District Court for the Eastern District of California denied without prejudice the Tahoe Regional Planning Agency’s motion to serve defendants Danil Reziapkine and Kirill M. Zameyer by publication. The court held that the supporting affidavits did not state facts establishing a cause of action as required by California Code of Civil Procedure section 415.50(a), and that plaintiff had not identified a newspaper or explained why it was most likely to provide actual notice. The court also vacated the previously scheduled hearing.

Holdings

1. A motion for service by publication must be supported by an affidavit stating facts from which the court can conclude that a cause of action exists against the defendant or that the defendant is a necessary or proper party. Plaintiff's affidavits, which addressed only service efforts, failed to satisfy that requirement.
2. A request for service by publication must identify a named newspaper most likely to give actual notice and explain why that newspaper satisfies the statutory standard. Plaintiff failed to make that showing.

Questions Presented

1. Whether plaintiff satisfied California Code of Civil Procedure section 415.50(a)'s requirement to submit an affidavit stating facts from which the court could conclude that a cause of action existed against the defendants or that they were necessary or proper parties.
2. Whether plaintiff satisfied California Code of Civil Procedure section 415.50(b) by identifying a named newspaper most likely to give actual notice and explaining why that newspaper was appropriate.

Disposition

other