Fernhill Owners Community Assn. No. 1 v. Garra CA4/3

California Court of Appeal Sep 19, 2024 No. G062778Unpublished

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court held that service of a motion for attorney fees at a party's residence is valid under Code of Civil Procedure section 1013, subdivision (a), and that substantial evidence supported the trial court's finding that the defendant resided at the address where service was effected.

Issues

Whether service of a motion for attorney fees by mail at a party's residence is valid under Code of Civil Procedure section 1013, subdivision (a).
Whether the trial court's factual finding that the defendant resided at the address where service was effected is supported by substantial evidence.

Disposition. affirmed

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“Section 1013(a) governs service by mail. It requires service to “the office address as last given by that person on any document filed in the cause and served on the party making service by mail; otherwise at that party’s place of residence.””

Filed 9/19/24 Fernhill Owners Community Assn. No. 1 v. Garra CA4/3

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS

California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION THREE

FERNHILL OWNERS COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION NO. 1, G062778

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. 30-2019-01069232) v. OPINION TERESE HELENE GARRA,

Defendant and Appellant.

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of Orange County, Melissa R. McCormick, Judge. Affirmed. MBK Chapman and William D. Chapman for Defendant and Appellant. Community Legal Advisors and Jeffrey W. Speights for Plaintiff and Respondent.

1 Defendant Terese Helene Garra appeals from a judgment awarding attorney fees to plaintiff Fernhill Owners Community Association No. 1 (Fernhill HOA). Garra asserts she was not properly served with the motion for fees, rendering the order awarding fees and the resulting judgment void. The trial court found Garra, who was representing herself in propria persona, was served at her place of residence, which is authorized service pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 1013, subdivision (a) 2 (section 1013(a)). We find no error and affirm. STATEMENT OF FACTS In May 2018, Garra purchased a townhome in Huntington Beach, California (the Huntington Beach property). The Huntington Beach property is in a common interest development overseen by Fernhill HOA. In May 2019, Fernhill HOA filed a complaint against Garra, alleging she had violated Fernhill HOA’s governing documents by renting the Huntington Beach property to multiple third parties rather than using it as a single- family dwelling (the Action). In October 2019, Garra filed a cross-complaint in the Action. On or about November 15, 2021, Garra stopped renting out the Huntington Beach property and moved into it herself. Garra had been represented by counsel in the Action, but in December 2021, she filed a substitution of attorney giving notice she would be representing herself. The

Fernhill Owners Community Assn. No. 1 v. Garra CA4/3

AI Brief

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION THREE

FERNHILL OWNERS COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION NO. 1, G062778

More from California Court of Appeal

Related research

GOODING, J.

MOORE, ACTING P. J.

MOTOIKE, J.

AI Brief