Motion to Extend Time for Service and Authorize Alternative Service
LAW AND MOTION CALENDAR JULY 24, 2026
3. L&J ASSETS v. PREHODA, SC20050069
Motion to Extend Time for Service and Authorize Alternative Service
On May 18, 2026, Bag Fund, LLC (“Bag Fund”) filed the instant motion seeking a
court order to extend time to perform service of, and authorize alternative service for,
the Application for Renewal of Judgment (submitted October 16, 2025), which needs to
be personally served within 90 days of filing pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure
section 683.180, subdivision (b).
1.
Background
On November 4, 2005, plaintiff L&J Assets LLC (“plaintiff”) obtained a default
judgment against defendant Kenneth Prehoda (“defendant”) in the amount of
$56,159.94. On February 26, 2007, plaintiff recorded an abstract of judgment in El
Dorado County, thereby creating a lien on all of defendant’s real property located within
the county. (See, Code Civ. Proc., § 674; Industrial Indem. Co. v. Levine (1975) 49
Cal.App.3d 698, 713 [recordation of abstract of judgment creates a lien on real property
of the judgment debtor located in county where abstract of judgment is recorded].) It
appears that, at the time the abstract of judgment was recorded, defendant owned the
real property located at 1048 Trout Creek in South Lake Tahoe, California (the
“Property”).
In 2008, plaintiff assigned the judgment to Bag Fund. In 2013, defendant recorded a
transfer of the Property to his daughter (Bona Prehoda a/k/a Bona Gail a/k/a Bona Gail Hebert). On October 19, 2015, Bag Fund renewed the judgment for 10 years.
In 2018, defendant’s daughter recorded a transfer of the Property to Mark Babo and
Looking for case law or statutes not cited here? Search published authorities
Examples: “Why did the court rule this way?” · “What were the procedural grounds?” · “Is appearance required?”
On October 16, 2025, Bag Fund filed another Application for Renewal of Judgment.1
1 On January 30, 2026, the court granted Bag Fund’s motion for a nunc pro tunc order
deeming its Application for Renewal of Judgment to be recorded in the El Dorado County Recorder’s Office as of October 19, 2025.
LAW AND MOTION CALENDAR JULY 24, 2026
2. Legal Principles
“A judgment lien on real property is effective only during the period of enforceability
of the judgment. [Citations.] Like the judgment, the judgment lien can also be extended
by 10 years if renewed. ([Code Civ. Proc.,] § 683.180, subd. (a); § 697.310, subd. (b).)”
maintain the lien priority, the judgment creditor must comply with Code of Civil
Procedure section 683.180. “Once renewed, ‘[t]he priority of the judgment lien on an
interest in real property remains the same.’ [Citations.]” (Starcevic, supra, at p. 375.) As provided in Code of Civil Procedure section 683.180, subdivision (b),2 if the
interest in real property has been transferred subject to the lien and the transfer has
been recorded, an extension pursuant to this section extends the lien on the property in
the hands of the transferee only if the transferee is served notice of the renewal and
proof of service is filed within the prescribed time. “[T]he obvious purpose of [Code of
Civil Procedure] section 683.180 is to provide notice to third persons that a judgment
lien has been extended. [Citation.]” (Beneficial Financial, Inc. v. Durkee (1988) 206
Cal.App.3d 912, 917.)
3.
Discussion
Based on a filing date of October 16, 2025, Code of Civil Procedure section 683.180
required Bag Fund to personally serve a copy of the Application for Renewal upon the
transferees, Mark Babo and Doreen Babo, on or before January 14, 2026. Bag Fund claims that, despite diligent efforts, it has been unable to personally serve the Babos.
(See, Clark Decl., ¶¶ 4–11 & Exs. A, B.) As such, Bag Fund seeks to extend the time to
2 Code of Civil Procedure section 683.180, subdivision (b) provides: “A judgment lien on
an interest in real property that has been transferred subject to the lien is not extended pursuant to subdivision (a) if the transfer was recorded before the application for renewal was filed unless both of the following requirements are satisfied: [¶] (1) A copy of the application for renewal is personally served on the transferee. [¶] (2) Proof of such service is filed with the court clerk within 90 days after the filing of the application for renewal.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 683.310, subd. (b).)
LAW AND MOTION CALENDAR JULY 24, 2026
serve the Babos and obtain the court’s authorization to serve the Babos by publication
or mail.
The court has reviewed the declarations of diligence submitted by Bag Fund. The
declarations do not show that Bag Fund made any attempt to personally serve the
Babos before the January 14, 2026, deadline. The earliest attempt did not occur until
March 23, 2026. Thus, even if the court had the authority to extend the statutory
deadline (the court is not convinced it does), it would still deny Bag Funds requests
under the circumstances.
TENTATIVE RULING # 3: THE MOTION IS DENIED. NO HEARING ON THIS MATTER WILL
BE HELD (LEWIS v. SUPERIOR COURT (1999) 19 CAL.4TH 1232, 1247), UNLESS A NOTICE
OF INTENT TO APPEAR AND REQUEST FOR ORAL ARGUMENT IS TRANSMITTED
ELECTRONICALLY THROUGH THE COURT’S WEBSITE OR BY TELEPHONE TO THE COURT
AT (530) 573-3042 BY 4:00 P.M. ON THE DAY THE TENTATIVE RULING IS ISSUED.
NOTICE TO ALL PARTIES OF AN INTENT TO APPEAR MUST BE MADE BY TELEPHONE OR
IN PERSON. PROOF OF SERVICE OF SAID NOTICE MUST BE FILED PRIOR TO OR AT THE
HEARING.