12345678910111213141516171819202122232425262728
1571178
SPECIALLY-APPEARING DEFENDANT DAVID MISCAVIGE’S MOTION TO QUASH SERVICE OF SUMMONS AND FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT
E
L K I N S
K
A L T
W
E I N T R A U B
R
E U B E N
G
A R T S I D E L L P
1 0 3 4 5 W . O l y m p i c B l v d . L o s A n g e l e s , C a l i f o r n i a 9 0 0 6 4 T e l e p h o n e : 3 1 0 . 7 4 6 . 4 4 0 0 • F a c s i m i l e : 3 1 0 . 7 4 6 . 4 4 9 9
ELKINS KALT WEINTRAUB REUBEN GARTSIDE LLP JEFFREY K. RIFFER, State Bar No. 87016
jriffer@elkinskalt.com
10345 W. Olympic Blvd. Los Angeles, California 90064 Telephone: 310.746.4400 Facsimile: 310.746.4499 Attorneys for Specially-Appearing Defendant David Miscavige SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, CENTRAL DISTRICT CHRISSIE CARNELL BIXLER; CEDRIC BIXLER-ZAVALA; JANE DOE #1; MARIE BOBETTE RIALES; and JANE DOE #2, Plaintiffs, v. CHURCH OF SCIENTOLOGY INTERNATIONAL; RELIGIOUS TECHNOLOGY CENTER; CHURCH OF SCIENTOLOGY CELEBRITY CENTRE INTERNATIONAL; DAVID MISCAVIGE; DANIEL MASTERSON; and DOES 1-25, Defendants. CASE No. 19STCV29458 [Assigned for All Purposes to: Hon. Steven J. Kleifield, Dept. 57]
SPECIALLY-APPEARING DEFENDANT DAVID MISCAVIGE’S NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION TO QUASH SERVICE OF SUMMONS AND FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT; MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES
[Declarations of Lynn R. Farny, Warren McShane, Stano Sersen, Shun Tokunaga, Ervin Kisded, and Davide Greco; Request for Judicial Notice; and [Proposed] Order filed concurrently herewith]
Date: May 12, 2021 Time: 8:30 a.m. Dept.: 57 RESERVATION ID: 368970839993631373510631 Action Filed: August 22, 2019 Trial Date: Not Set
Electronically FILED by Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles on 01/11/2021 05:27 PM Sherri R. Carter, Executive Officer/Clerk of Court, by M. Soto,Deputy Clerk
12345678910111213141516171819202122232425262728
1571178
SPECIALLY-APPEARING DEFENDANT DAVID MISCAVIGE’S MOTION TO QUASH SERVICE OF SUMMONS AND FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT
E
L K I N S
K
A L T
W
E I N T R A U B
R
E U B E N
G
A R T S I D E L L P
1 0 3 4 5 W . O l y m p i c B l v d . L o s A n g e l e s , C a l i f o r n i a 9 0 0 6 4 T e l e p h o n e : 3 1 0 . 7 4 6 . 4 4 0 0 • F a c s i m i l e : 3 1 0 . 7 4 6 . 4 4 9 9
TO ALL PARTIES AND THEIR COUNSEL OF RECORD: PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that on May 12, 2021 at 8:30 a.m., or as soon thereafter as counsel shall be heard, in Department 57 of the Superior Court for the State of California for the County of Los Angeles, located at 111 N. Hill Street, Los Angeles, California, 90012, Defendant David Miscavige will specially appear and move the Court for an order quashing the purported service of the summons and First Amended Complaint on Mr. David Miscavige. The Motion is made under the authority of
Code of Civil Procedure
§ 418.10 on the ground that Mr. Miscavige was never served with the summons and operative complaint. The Motion is made upon this Notice, the attached memorandum of points and authorities, the Declarations of Lynn R. Farny, Warren McShane, Stano Sersen, Shun Tokunaga, Ervin Kisded, and Davide Greco, the Request for Judicial Notice, all pleadings and documents on file in this action, such further papers and authorities as may be filed in support hereof, and oral argument as may be presented at the hearing on the Motion. DATED: January 11, 2021 ELKINS KALT WEINTRAUB REUBEN GARTSIDE LLP By: JEFFREY K. RIFFER Attorneys for Specially-Appearing Defendant David Miscavige
12345678910111213141516171819202122232425262728
1571178
3
SPECIALLY-APPEARING DEFENDANT DAVID MISCAVIGE’S MOTION TO QUASH SERVICE OF SUMMONS AND FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT
E
L K I N S
K
A L T
W
E I N T R A U B
R
E U B E N
G
A R T S I D E L L P
1 0 3 4 5 W . O l y m p i c B l v d . L o s A n g e l e s , C a l i f o r n i a 9 0 0 6 4 T e l e p h o n e : 3 1 0 . 7 4 6 . 4 4 0 0 • F a c s i m i l e : 3 1 0 . 7 4 6 . 4 4 9 9
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
I.
INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................. 5
II.
STATEMENT OF FACTS ..................................................................................... 5
A.
This Court Quashed Plaintiffs’ First False Proof of Service ..................... 5
B.
Plaintiffs Delayed Any Attempt to Serve the First Amended Complaint for
Nine Months
........................................................................ 7
1.
6331 Hollywood Boulevard .............................................................. 8
2.
1710 Ivar Avenue ............................................................................. 8
III.
THE MOTION TO QUASH SHOULD BE GRANTED ...................................... 12
A.
Plaintiffs’ Purported Attempts at Substituted Service Did Not Confer Jurisdiction ................................................................................... 13
1.
6331 Hollywood Boulevard is Not a Proper Place for Service ............................................................................................ 14
2.
Plaintiffs Did Not Exercise Reasonable Diligence Before Resorting to Substitute Service ..................................................... 15
3.
Even If Substitute Service Was Permitted — It Was Not — Plaintiffs Failed to Comply With The Statutory Requirements ................................................................................. 18
IV.
CONCLUSION .................................................................................................... 19
