Trial Court Abused Discretion In Failing To Set Aside Default.

Plaintiff was unsuccessful at personally serving defendant and obtained the court’s permission to serve by publication. Defendant claims it first learned of the lawsuit and the default judgment of $372,403.81 after it received a lien notice from the county with the abstract of judgment attached. On appeal, defendant contended the trial court erred in denying its motion to set aside the default and default judgment on the ground that plaintiff did not comply with Civil Code section 587, which states: “An application by a plaintiff for entry of default . . . shall include an affidavit stating that a copy of the application has been mailed to the defendant’s attorney of record or, if none, to the defendant at his or her last known address and the date on which the copy was mailed. If no such address of the defendant is known to the plaintiff or plaintiff’s attorney, the affidavit shall state that fact. [¶] No default . . . shall be entered, unless the affidavit is filed. The nonreceipt of the notice shall not invalidate or constitute ground for setting aside any judgment.” In reversing, the appellate court rejected plaintiff’s argument that defendant’s address was unknown because it had been unable to personally serve the defendant at any of the addresses it discovered. (Murray & Murray v. Raissi Real Estate Development, LLC (Cal. App. Sixth Dist.; January 20, 2015) 233 Cal.App.4th 379, [182 Cal.Rptr.3d 611].)