Motion for judgment on the pleadings
PLACER COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT THURSDAY, CIVIL LAW AND MOTION DEPARTMENT 3 THE HONORABLE MICHAEL W. JONES TENTATIVE RULINGS FOR JUNE 4, 2026, AT 8:30 A.M.
2. M-CV-0091212 WELLS FARGO BANK v. FINIGAN, CARLY
The motion for judgment on the pleadings is dropped from calendar in light of defendant’s bankruptcy proceedings.
3. M-CV-0094880 CAMPBELL WASHBURN v. FLYING J RANCH
Specially Appearing Defendants Motion to Quash Improper Service of Summons
Preliminary Matters
Defendants’ requests for judicial notice are granted.
Ruling on Motion
Defendants move to quash the service of summons on them pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 418.10. Notably, defendants contend service was improper because it was accomplished pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 415.40 despite defendants being in California.
Where, as here, defendants challenge the “courts personal jurisdiction on the ground of improper service of process[,]” plaintiff bears the burden “to prove the existence of jurisdiction by proving, inter alia, the facts requisite to an effective service.” (Summers v. McClanahan (2006) 140 Cal.App.4th 403, 413.)
Plaintiff does not oppose the motion and thus does not meet its burden to prove the existence of jurisdiction. Even assuming arguendo plaintiff did oppose the motion, the service effectuated here is nonetheless improper because defendants are California residents and have a presence in California.
Accordingly, defendants’ motion is granted. The service of summons made on defendants Flying J Ranch, LLC, Shannon B. Jones Law Group, Inc., 300 Diablo, LLC, 300 Diablo II, LLC are hereby quashed.
///
PLACER SUPERIOR COURT – DEPARTMENT 3 Thursday Civil Law and Motion – Tentative Rulings
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?”