## Facts

- A landlord and a tenant entered a written residential lease beginning April 1, 2017, for a Studio City property at $16,000 monthly rent with a $25,000 security deposit.
- The lease was extended through March 31, 2019, at $16,480 per month.
- The tenant purchased a different residence and moved out of the leased property; the landlord was aware of the tenant’s new residential address through communications and documents related to the move-out.
- The landlord sued the tenant for breach of contract and negligence after she vacated the property.
- A registered process server attempted personal service multiple times and filed three non-service reports describing unsuccessful attempts at the Studio City and the tenant’s new residence.
- The process server later filed a proof of substituted service stating the summons and complaint were left with an employee at a private mailbox business (a commercial mail receiving agency) where the tenant maintained a mailbox, and that copies were mailed to that same address.
- Based on the proof of service, the trial court entered default and a default judgment against the tenant; the landlord later garnished the tenant’s bank accounts.
- The tenant moved to vacate the default and default judgment under Code of Civil Procedure sections 473(d) and 473.5, asserting defective service, lack of actual notice, and lack of personal jurisdiction.
- The trial court denied the motion; the tenant appealed.

## Issues

1. Whether substituted service at a commercial mailbox business, by leaving process with an employee and mailing to that address, satisfied Code of Civil Procedure section 415.20(b).
2. Whether the plaintiff showed reasonable diligence in attempting personal service before using substituted service.
3. Whether defective service deprived the trial court of personal jurisdiction, rendering the default and default judgment void and requiring relief under sections 473(d) and/or 473.5.

## Decision

- The Court of Appeal reversed the order denying the motion to vacate.
- The court held substituted service was defective and did not comply with section 415.20(b).
- The court held the trial court never acquired personal jurisdiction over the tenant; the default and default judgment were void.
- The case was remanded with directions to vacate the default and default judgment and to set aside the garnishment order.

## Legal Principles

- Substituted service under Code of Civil Procedure section 415.20(b) requires (1) prior reasonable diligence in attempting personal service, (2) delivery at the defendant’s dwelling house, usual place of abode, usual place of business, or usual mailing address other than a U.S. Postal Service post office box, and (3) mailing to the same address.
- A commercial mail receiving agency is not a defendant’s “dwelling house” or “usual place of abode,” and an employee of such a business is not a “competent member of the household” for section 415.20(b) purposes.
- A default judgment entered without strict compliance with statutory service requirements is void for lack of personal jurisdiction and is subject to being set aside under section 473(d).
- Relief may also be warranted under section 473.5 when service does not result in actual notice in time to defend the action.
- A defendant has no obligation to respond to a defectively served summons, and nonappearance does not cure jurisdictional defects.

## Conclusion

The Court of Appeal held that substituted service at a private mailbox business, without reasonable diligence and without serving at a qualifying address under section 415.20(b), failed to confer personal jurisdiction; the resulting default and default judgment were void and had to be vacated with related enforcement orders set aside.


Kremerman v. White, 71 Cal. App. 5th 358, 286 Cal. Rptr. 3d 283 (Cal. Ct. App. 2021)