Moon V Na Ca27

Key Facts

Transaction Type

Issues

• The appellant argues the default judgment against him is void on its face because the proof of service is defective. Specifically, Jongju Na contends that Sung Joo Na's statement that he was authorized to receive service for Jongju Na as part of Leading Town is insufficient to prove agency under section 416.90. The court must determine whether the judgment roll facially demonstrates proper service or if extrinsic evidence is needed to show invalidity, and whether the presumption of valid service under Evidence Code section 647 applies when a registered process server effected service on an agent.
• The appellant filed a motion to set aside the default judgment under Code of Civil Procedure section 473, subdivision (d), arguing the judgment is void on its face due to defective proof of service. The trial court denied the motion, finding the proofs of service executed by a registered process server demonstrate service on the Defendants. The court must determine if the trial court abused its discretion in deciding not to set aside the judgment, considering that the invalidity must be apparent from inspection of the judgment roll without consideration of extrinsic evidence.
• The defendants argue the merits of the underlying case should be considered on appeal, claiming the default judgment should be reversed regardless of procedural service issues. The court must determine if the default judgment bars appellants from advancing contentions on the merits, as entry of default operates as an admission of the allegations of the complaint and is barred both substantively and procedurally.

Holdings

Remedies

Contract Value

Monetary Damages

Legal Principles

• When a defendant challenges the court's personal jurisdiction on the ground of improper service of process, the burden is on the plaintiff to prove the existence of jurisdiction by proving, inter alia, the facts requisite to an effective service. The plaintiff must demonstrate that service was properly effected to establish jurisdiction.
• Under Evidence Code section 647, a registered process server's declaration of service establishes a rebuttable presumption that the facts stated in the declaration are true. The filing of a proof of service by a registered process server creates a rebuttable presumption service was properly effected if the proof of service conforms to the statutory requirements of service of process.
• Code of Civil Procedure section 416.90 authorizes the plaintiff to personally serve a defendant by delivering a copy of the summons and complaint to the defendant's agent authorized to accept service. Service on an agent authorized to accept service is a valid method of service that conforms to statutory requirements. Section 473, subdivision (d) allows trial court to set aside void judgments or orders, but extrinsic evidence cannot be submitted on such motions.
• Under Dill v. Berquist Construction Co., an extrajudicial statement of a person that he or she is the agent of another is not admissible to prove the fact of agency unless the statement is either made in the presence of or communicated to the principal and the principal acquiesces in that statement. This principle applies to motions under Code of Civil Procedure section 473, subdivision (d) where extrinsic evidence cannot be submitted.

Precedent Name

• Pittman v. Beck Park Apartments Ltd. (2018) 20 Cal.App.5th 1009
• Summers v. McClanahan (2006) 140 Cal.App.4th 403
• W. Bradley Electric, Inc. v. Mitchell Engineering (2024) 100 Cal.App.5th 1
• California Capital Ins. Co. v. Hoehn (2024) 17 Cal.5th 207
• Grados v. Shiau (2021) 63 Cal.App.5th 1042
• Dill v. Berquist Construction Co. (1994) 24 Cal.App.4th 1426

Cited Statute

• Code of Civil Procedure
• Evidence Code

Judge Name

• Feuer, Judge
• Segal, Acting Presiding Judge
• Stone, Judge

Passage Text

• An order is considered void on its face only when the invalidity is apparent from an inspection of the judgment roll or court record without consideration of extrinsic evidence. If the invalidity can be shown only through consideration of extrinsic evidence, such as declarations or testimony, the order is not void on its face.
• The order denying the motion by Kyonga Nam, Sung Joo Na, and Jongju Na to vacate the default judgment is affirmed. Moon is to recover his costs on appeal.
• A registered process server effected service on Jongju Na by serving an agent authorized to accept service, Sung Joo Na, while Sung Joo Na was in a car outside the business address of Leading Town in San Diego. That was a valid method of service that conformed to the statutory requirements of service of process.

Damages / Relief Type