California Court of Appeal

In a case involving a default judgment arising from plaintiff's attempt to join defendant as a Doe defendant, which served a summons on defendant that omitted the requisite statutory notice that he was served by the fictitious name, denial of defendant's motion to vacate the default is reversed where, even if the trial court's rationale could ever sustain a default judgment over a defendant's objection that service did not comply with statutory requirements, the record does not show partial or colorable compliance with the requirement on which defendant's objection was predicated, and thus a finding of substantial compliance could not be sustained.

Appellate Information

• Decided 11/24/2009
• Published 11/24/2009

Judges

• RUSHING, P.J.

Court

• California Court of Appeal

Counsel

• For Appellees:
  
• Carr & Ferrell, Stuart C. Clark, Christopher P. Grewe, Palo Alto, for Defendant and Appellant Amit Haller., Janin, Morgan & Brenner, Oakland, David B. Tillotson, John A. Lofton, for Plaintiff and Respondent Carol Gilbert, Inc.