Summary
The United States District Court for the Eastern District of California partially granted the Tahoe Regional Planning Agency’s renewed motion to serve defendants Danil Reziapkine and Kirill M. Zameyer by publication. The court found that reasonable diligence had been used to attempt personal service and that sufficient evidence supported a claim against Reziapkine under TRPA Code § 84.10.2, but found insufficient, hearsay-based evidence of a claim or proper-party status as to Zameyer. The court authorized publication in the Tahoe Daily Tribune for four successive weeks as to Reziapkine and denied the motion as to Zameyer without prejudice.
Holdings
- Plaintiff demonstrated that Reziapkine and Zameyer could not be served by another authorized method with reasonable diligence.
- Service by publication was authorized as to Reziapkine because plaintiff established both reasonable diligence and a cause of action against him.
- Service by publication was not authorized as to Zameyer because plaintiff did not provide sufficient admissible evidence establishing a cause of action against him or showing that he was a necessary or proper party.
- Plaintiff must publish the summons in the Tahoe Daily Tribune once a week for four successive weeks, with at least five days intervening between publication dates, and must comply with the order's filing and mailing deadlines.
Questions Presented
- Whether plaintiff exercised reasonable diligence in attempting to personally serve Reziapkine and Zameyer before seeking service by publication.
- Whether plaintiff presented sufficient admissible evidence to establish a cause of action against Reziapkine or establish that he was a necessary or proper party.
- Whether plaintiff presented sufficient admissible evidence to establish a cause of action against Zameyer or establish that he was a necessary or proper party.
- What publication and related mailing procedures should govern service on Reziapkine if authorized.
Disposition
other
Cases Cited (3)
- Donel, Inc. v. Badalian, 87 Cal. App. 3d 327, 333 (1978)(followed)
- Rios v. Singh, 65 Cal. App. 5th 871, 884 (2021)(followed)
- Doe v. Santa Clara Cnty. Dep’t of Health & Hum. Servs., No. 22-cv-04948-JSW, 2023 WL 6450420, at *5 (N.D. Cal. Oct. 3, 2023)(followed)
Cited In (0)
No citing cases on record yet.