TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Tandy Corp. v. Superior Court

TANDY CORPORATION, Petitioner, v. THE SUPERIOR COURT OF SACRAMENTO COUNTY, Respondent; WILLIAM LEKOFF Et Al., Real Parties in Interest

Tandy Corp. v. Superior Court, 117 Cal. App. 3d 911 (1981)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
California Court of Appeal · State Appellate Courts
Decided
March 23, 1981
Docket
No. Civ. 20462
Judges
Regan
Citations
117 Cal. App. 3d 911173 Cal. Rptr. 811981 Cal. App. LEXIS 1609

Opinion — Regan

Opinion REGAN, Acting P. J.

Petitioner, a defendant in a wrongful death action, seeks a writ of mandate to compel the grant of its motions to quash service and dismiss it from the action on the basis that service of summons and return thereof had not occurred within three years of the commencement of the action, as required by Code of Civil Procedure section 581a, subdivision (a).

1

Upon examination of the petition, the opposition, and their supporting materials, we conclude that the respondent court erred in denying the motions. Real parties attempted service under section 415.30 by mailing copies of the summons and first amended complaint, and the appropriate notice and acknowledgment of receipt of summons (§ 415.30, subd. (a)), to petitioner’s agent for service in California by certified mail, return receipt requested. However, the acknowledgement was not executed and returned by the agent, hence service was not completed. (§ 415.30, subd. (c).) The postal service return receipt does not suffice as a substitute for an executed acknowledgement of receipt of summons. Similarly, service was not completed under section 415.40 inasmuch as no person outside this state was involved. Nor was service sufficient under section 415.20. In order to obtain in personam jurisdiction by a form of constructive service, there must be strict compliance with the requisite statutory procedures.

(Stamps v. Superior Court (1971) 14 Cal.App.3d 108, 109 [ 92 Cal.Rptr. 151 ].) Real parties have not complied with any applicable manner of service prescribed by any California statute.

Subsequent to the respondent court’s order denying petitioner’s motions to quash and dismiss (and subsequent to the expiration of the three-year period), real parties personally served petitioner. This of course was too late under section 581a, subdivision (a), unless the tardiness may be excused pursuant to the limited principles delineated in *914 Hocharian v. Superior Court (1981) 28 Cal.3d 714 [ 170 Cal.Rptr. 790 , 621 P.2d 829 ].

The petition herein was served upon real parties, who filed responsive points and authorities. This court is thus empowered to issue a peremptory writ without prior issuance of an alternative writ. (Code Civ. Proc., § 1088;

Central & West Basin Water etc. Dist.

v. Wong (1976) 55 Cal.App.3d 191, 196 [ 127 Cal.Rptr. 448 ];

Goodenough v. Superior Court (1971) 18 Cal.App.3d 692, 697 [ 96 Cal.Rptr. 165 ].)

Accordingly, let a peremptory writ of mandate issue directing the trial court to vacate its order denying petitioner’s motions to quash service and dismiss, and to grant said motions; unless after conducting an evidentiary hearing upon motion brought within 30 days after finality of this writ the trial court concludes that real parties’ failure to serve summons and make return thereof within the statutory period is excused under Hocharian v. Superior Court, supra, 28 Cal.3d 714 .

Paras, J., and Blease, J., concurred.

The petition of real parties in interest for a hearing by the Supreme Court was denied May 21, 1981.

1

AII further statutory references are to the Code of Civil Procedure.

How later courts describe this case

Explanatory parentheticals written by citing courts — 4 in all; the most informative distinct ones are shown.

Cited by 15 cases

View all citing references →
1982: 31984: 11994: 21997: 12018: 22019: 12023: 22024: 12025: 219822026peak 1982 · 3

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Tandy Corp. v. Superior Court129 Cal. App. 3d 734 (1982)
  2. Brian Barlow v. George Ground, Officer 9129 L.O. Oberlies, Officer 1706 A. Tucker, Officer 9363 Ray Shay, Officer 326939 F.3d 231 (9th Cir. 1994)
  3. Agnes L. Morse v. Elmira Country Club752 F.2d 35 (2d Cir. 1984)
  4. Calvert v. Al Binali241 Cal. Rptr. 3d 42 (2018)
  5. Evans v. Department of Motor Vehicles21 Cal. App. 4th 958 (1994)
  6. Lesko v. Superior Court127 Cal. App. 3d 476 (1982)

Most recent

  1. Anna Mishina Shteerman v. City and County of San FranciscoNo. 3:25-cv-03758 (N.D. Cal. Nov. 24, 2025)
  2. Ottele v. MartinezNo. 1:22-cv-00187 (E.D. Cal. May 13, 2025)
  3. Jose Rodriguez v. Dairy Conveyor CorporationNo. 8:23-cv-01683 (C.D. Cal. Feb. 26, 2024)
  4. (PC) Lamon v. McTaggartNo. 1:22-cv-01421 (E.D. Cal. Aug. 21, 2023)
  5. Hudson v. DebowNo. E078375 (Cal. Ct. App. May 31, 2023)
  6. Adam J. Tenser v. Robert Joshua RyanNo. 2:19-cv-05496 (C.D. Cal. Sept. 25, 2019)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 4

DepthCaseCited by
Hocharian v. Superior Court, 621 P.2d 829 (Cal. 1981) 75
Goodenough v. Superior Court, 18 Cal. App. 3d 692 (1971) 99
Stamps v. Superior Court, 14 Cal. App. 3d 108 (1971) 16
Cent. & West Basin Water Replenishment Dist. v. Wong, 55 Cal. App. 3d 191 (1976) 11

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list