JANE DOE VS. CHRISTIAN LARSEN ET AL

Set for Law and Motion/Discovery Calendar on Friday, February 27, 2026, Line 8. PLAINTIFF JANE DOE's MOTION TO QUASH SERVICE OF SUMMONS OR STAY OR DISMISS: Cross-defendant Jane Doe aka Julia G. Ko's ("Ko") motion to quash is DENIED. The court grants Ko's request for judicial notice. (Evidence Code section 452(d) [court records].)

Cross-defendant Ko brings this motion on behalf of herself and Creditcare, Inc. Creditcare, Inc., however, is not named as a party in the cross-complaint and is not a party to this action. Ko mischaracterizes the caption of the cross-complaint.

Ko's motion to quash fails. First, Ko consented to this court's jurisdiction by filing the complaint in this action. (See Van Loben Sels v. Bunnell (1901) 131 Cal. 489, 494 [even failure to properly serve a cross-complaint on a party could not "affect the question of jurisdiction, for they were already in court, and subject to its jurisdiction"].)

Second, the record demonstrates that cross-complainant Ripple Labs, Inc. ("Ripple") properly served the cross-complaint on Ko. Per CCP 428.60(2), Ripple only needed to serve the cross-complaint on Ko's counsel, which occurred. Indeed, Ko even answered the cross-complaint. No summons was necessary because Ko already appeared in the action. (Fox Woodsum Lumber Co. v. Janes (1946) 76 Cal.App.2d 748, 751.)

Ko notes that Ripple has filed multiple proofs of service and the clerk has yet to enter a default. This observation is irrelevant. The proof of service attached to the cross-complaint filed on 7/16/24 is sufficient and the clerk's preference for a Judicial Council form of proof of service is of no moment.

If the tentative is contested, the matter will be heard on March 12, 2026 at 1:00 p.m before Judge True in department 302. For the 9:00 a.m. calendar, all attorneys and parties may appear in Department 302 remotely or in person. Remote hearings will be conducted by videoconference using Zoom. (Dept. 302 Zoom ID 160 409 7690; Passcode 516287.) To appear remotely at the hearing, go to the court's website at sfsuperiorcourt.org under "Online Services," navigate to "Tentative Rulings," and click on the appropriate link, or dial the corresponding phone number.

Any party who contests a tentative ruling must send an email to contestdept302tr@sftc.org with a copy to all other parties by 4pm stating, without argument, the portion(s) of the tentative ruling that the party contests. The subject line of the email shall include the line number, case name and case number. The text of the email shall include the name and contact information, including email address, of the attorney or party who will appear at the hearing.

Counsel for the prevailing party is required to prepare a proposed order which repeats verbatim the substantive portion of the tentative ruling and must email it to contestdept302tr@sftc.org prior to the hearing even if the tentative ruling is not contested.

The court no longer provides a court reporter in the Law & Motion Department. Parties may retain their own reporter, who may appear in the courtroom or remotely. A retained reporter must be a California certified court reporter (CSR), for only a CSR's transcript may be used in California courts. If a CSR is being retained, include in your email all of the following: their name, CSR and telephone numbers, and their individual work email address. = (302/JMT)