Anderson v. Zielomski CA2/3

Filed 3/27/23 Anderson v. Zielomski CA2/3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION THREE

MICHAEL D. ANDERSON, B317200

Plaintiff and Respondent, Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. GC050036 v.

RICK ZIELOMSKI,

Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, John P. Doyle, Judge. Affirmed.

The Perry Law Firm and Chris J. Hoo for Defendant and Appellant.

Anderson & Associates and Michael D. Anderson for Plaintiff and Respondent. _________________________

Michael D. Anderson obtained a default judgment against Rick Zielomski in 2012. Almost a decade later, Zielomski moved to set aside the judgment because the proof of service listed two dates of attempted service in 2020, rather than 2012. The trial court denied the motion. On appeal, Zielomski argues the proof of service and judgment are facially void for fraud. We disagree and affirm. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND In August 2012, attorney Michael D. Anderson filed a complaint against his former client, Rick Zielomski, to recover unpaid legal fees and costs. Three months later, Anderson filed a request for default judgment, along with a copy of the proof of service of the summons and complaint. Anderson attached to the proof of service an affidavit of due diligence, which the process server signed on September 4, 2012. The affidavit states the process server attempted to serve Zielomski at his home on “08/30/20” and “08/31/20.” According to the affidavit, on “09/01/12,” the process server left a copy of the documents at Zielomski’s house with “ ‘JOHN DOE’, CO-OCCUPANT, White, Male, 60 Years Old, Gray Hair, 6 Feet, 175 Pounds.” The process server mailed a copy of the documents to Zielomski three days later. On November 28, 2012, the trial court entered default judgment against Zielomski for $96,232.75. Zielomski paid Anderson around $50,000 towards the judgment over the next few years, but he stopped making payments in 2015. In 2021, Anderson filed an application for order for sale of real property foreclosing upon a judgment lien. Zielomski responded by filing a motion to vacate and set aside the default and default judgment. According to the motion, Zielomski was