Northwood Place Apartments LLC vs. Ostrowski

Superior Court of the State of California County of Orange TENTATIVE RULINGS FOR C61 HON. JENNIFER M. MCCARTNEY

Date: 6/10/2026 Courtroom Rules and Notices

The Court will continue to upload tentative rulings as they are completed. Please be sure to keep checking until 8:30 AM on the day of your hearing.

Written responses, oppositions, or filings that are filed later than 12:15 PM the day before the hearing on the motion will go on second call by the Court for the Court to have an opportunity to review any lastminute filings. If a party files a written response, opposition, or any filing after 12:15 PM on the day before the hearing, the party must ensure they are available for the court's afternoon calendar the day of the hearing.

Submitting on tentative rulings: If all counsel intend to submit on the tentative ruling and do not desire oral argument, please advise the Courtroom Clerk or Courtroom Attendant by calling (657) 622-5261 – both counsel need to state they are submitting on the tentative. Please do not call the Department unless all parties submit to the tentative ruling. If all sides submit on the tentative ruling and so advise the Court, the tentative ruling shall become the Court’s final ruling, and the prevailing party shall give notice of the ruling and prepare an order for the Court’s signature if appropriate under Cal. R. Ct. 3.1312.

Non-appearances: If nobody appears for the hearing and the Court has not been notified that all parties submit on the tentative ruling, the Court shall determine whether the matter is taken off calendar or the tentative ruling becomes the final ruling. The Court also might make a different order at the hearing. (Lewis v. Fletcher Jones Motor Cars, Inc. (2012) 205 Cal.App.4th 436, 442, fn. 1.)

# Case Name Tentative 6 30-2026-01556931 The Court has read and considered the Plaintiff’s Motion to Deem Request Northwood Place for Admissions Set One Admitted (ROA 35). Apartments LLC vs. Ostrowski IT IS ORDERED that the Plaintiff's Motion to Deem Admitted the Facts Set Forth In Plaintiff's Request for Admission Set One be and hereby is granted and that the truth of all specified matters, and the genuineness of all specified documents, in the First Set of Requests for Admission, propounded by Plaintiff and served on Defendant Lana Ostrowski on May 21, 2026, be deemed admitted.

The Court orders the Defendant, Lana Ostrowski, forthwith to pay a sanction in the amount of $810 (Attorneys' Fees for 2 hours at $375 an hour and $60 filing fee) to Plaintiff's Counsel. This sum shall be made payable to "Kimball, Tirey & St. John, LLP" within 7 business days of service of this order, and shall be delivered to the Kimball, Tirey & St. John, LLP, 2040 Main Street, Suite 500, Irvine, CA 92614. If any party is required to further enforce the terms herein, the party enforcing this Judgment shall be entitled to further attorney's fees and costs.

The Court Orders Plaintiff to provide notice of the Court’s ruling.

7 30-2026-01564845 The Court has read and considered the Defendant’s Motion to Quash BRE-FMCA, LLC Service of Summons (ROA 25) and Plaintiff’s Opposition (ROA 28). vs. Rios The Court takes Judicial Notice of the Proof of Service of Summons (ROA 10).

A registered process server who made multiple attempts at personal service may proceed with substituted service under Code of Civil Procedure § 415.20. Here, the registered process server, George Craig (#2019267578), signed under penalty of perjury that he made multiple attempts to serve the defendant personally before proceeding with substituted service. On the third attempt to serve, the registered process server provided the documents to a woman at the premises, who answered the door, provided a physical description, took the paperwork, and refused to provide the registered process server with her name.

There is no indication that “Jane Doe” was not an occupant of the household or refused to accept the documents. Case law such as Zirbes v. Stratton (1986) 187 Cal. App. 3d 1407, 1416-1417 allows for substituted service, which is reasonably calculated to give notice – the circumstances here are reasonable that it would give notice to the Defendant.

The Court DENIES the Motion to Quash Service of Summons.

Defendant is ordered to file a responsive pleading within 5 calendar days.

Plaintiff is ordered to serve notice of the Court’s ruling.

8 30-2026-01567293 The Court has read and considered the Defendant’s Motion to Strike (ROA Nguyen vs. Rios 15) and the Complaint (ROA 2).

The Court DENIES the Motion to Strike.

The Court orders the Defendants to file an Answer within 5 business days.

The Plaintiff is ordered to provide notice of the Court’s ruling.

9 30-2026-01569587 The Court has read and considered the Defendants’ Motion to Quash Bridge WF Ca Service of Summons (ROA 13 & 18) and Plaintiff’s Oppositions (ROA 24 Crystal View LP vs. &26). Vickers The Court takes Judicial Notice of the Proof of Service of Summons (ROA 8 & 10).

California Evidence Code Section 647 creates a rebuttable presumption that a proof of service signed by a registered process server is true. It shifts the burden of proving lack of service to the defendant, rather than requiring the plaintiff to prove proper service. Here, registered process server Justin Martin (2655) declared under penalty of perjury that he personally served Ms. Vickers on Thursday, May 14, 2026, at 8:39 PM (ROA 10) and Ms.