| Case | County / Judge | Motion | Ruling | Indexed | Hearing |
|---|
MOTION TO QUASH SERVICE OF SUMMONS OR STAY OR DISMISS
Matter on the LAW AND MOTION / DISCOVERY CALENDAR FOR THURSDAY, JUL-31-2025, LINE 6. PLAINTIFF JOSEPH BANKS' MOTION TO QUASH SERVICE OF SUMMONS OR STAY OR DISMISS.
Plaintiff Joseph Alen Banks Jr's motion to quash is denied. Plaintiff Banks alleges he was assaulted at the Embarcadero Bart Station, then without cause arrested by Bart Police officers. He is suing BART and various officers for wrongful arrest.
On June 2, 2025, Defendants filed a cross-complaint against Larry Strickland, alleging Strickland was the person who assaulted Plaintiff. Defendants seek indemnity. Strickland is the only defendant named in the cross-complaint. Now, Plaintiff moves to quash service of the cross-complaint.
Plaintiff does not have standing to move to quash service of the summons and cross-complaint because he is not named as a defendant in the cross-complaint. "A defendant, on or before the last day of his or her time to plead...may serve and file a notice of motion...[t]o quash service of summons on the ground of lack of jurisdiction of the court over him or her." (Code of Civil Procedure section 418.10.) Plaintiff is not a defendant for purposes of the complaint or the cross-complaint. Thus, he is not able to make a motion to quash service of the cross-complaint.
Moreover, this court's jurisdiction over Plaintiff was settled when Plaintiff filed his complaint invoking the court's jurisdiction. Whether the court jurisdiction over Strickland is something that must be resolved, if ever, by motion by Strickland, not Plaintiff.
The timing requirements of California Rules of Court, rule 3.110, including subsection (c), are enforced by way of order to show cause issued by the court (in this court, issued by Department 610). (See California Rules of Court, rule 3.110(f).) Thus, Plaintiff's motion to enforce those requirements in this department and absent an order to show cause issued by the court fails.
For the 9:00 a.m. calendar, all attorneys and parties may appear in Department 302 remotely or in person. Remote hearings will be conducted by videoconference using Zoom. (Dept. 302 Zoom ID 160 409 7690; Passcode 516287.) To appear remotely at the hearing, go to the court's website at sfsuperiorcourt.org under "Online Services," navigate to "Tentative Rulings," and click on the appropriate link, or dial the corresponding phone number.
Looking for case law or statutes not cited here? Search published authorities
Examples: “Why did the court rule this way?” · “What were the procedural grounds?” · “Is appearance required?”
Any party who contests a tentative ruling must send an email to contestdept302tr@sftc.org with a copy to all other parties by 4pm stating, without argument, the portion(s) of the tentative ruling that the party contests. The subject line of the email shall include the line number, case name and case number. The text of the email shall include the name and contact information, including email address, of the attorney or party who will appear at the hearing.
Counsel for the prevailing party is required to prepare a proposed order which repeats verbatim the substantive portion of the tentative ruling and must email it to contestdept302tr@sftc.org prior to the hearing even if the tentative ruling is not contested.
The court no longer provides a court reporter in the Law & Motion Department. Parties may retain their own reporter, who may appear in the courtroom or remotely. A retained reporter must be a California certified court reporter (CSR), for only a CSR's transcript may be used in California courts. If a CSR is being retained, include in your email all of the following: their name, CSR and telephone numbers, and their individual work email address. =(302/JMQ) |