Legal Opinion

American Express Centurion Bank v. Zara

California Court of Appeal

Decided September 20, 2011No. H036216PublishedCited by 17 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

PREMO, J.

Plaintiff American Express Centurion Bank sued defendant Robert V. Zara for damages. Defendant moved to quash service of summons and the complaint on the ground that he was not served. The trial court denied the motion after reasoning that defendant had actual notice. It then granted defendant 10 days leave to file an answer. Defendant elected not to answer, and the trial court entered a default. It later rendered a default judgment against defendant for $61,988.85. On appeal, defendant contends that the trial court erroneously denied his motion to quash. We agree. We…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. McCorkle v. City of Los AngelesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1969
  2. Griffith Co. v. San Diego College for WomenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1955
  3. Dill v. Berquist Construction Co.California Court of Appeal · 1994
  4. Pasadena Medi-Center Associates v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1973
  5. Evartt v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1979

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by17 opinions

  1. Gottschalk v. City & County of San FranciscoDistrict Court, N.D. California · 2013
  2. Rodriguez v. Nam Min ChoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2015
  3. Board of Trustees of the Leland Stanford Junior University v. HamCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2013
  4. Lebel v. MaiCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2012
  5. Moss v. MossCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2012

12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API