Lundstrom v. Young

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 BRIAN LUNDSTROM, Case No. 3:18-cv-02856-GPC-MSB 12 Plaintiff, ORDER APPROVING APPLICATION FOR ORDER 13 v. AUTHORIZING REGISTERED PROCESS SERVER TO LEVY 14 CARLA YOUNG, et al., EXECUTION PURSUANT TO CAL. CODE CIV. PROC. § 15 Defendant. 699.080 16 [ECF No. 171]

17 On January 30, 2023, this Court granted Defendant Young (“Young”) 18 $67,617.10 in attorneys’ fees and $1,246.58 in costs, (ECF No. 143), and on March 19 21, 2023, the Court granted Young’s motion for entry of final judgment as to the 20 claims Plaintiff Lundstrom (“Lundstrom”) asserted against Young, (ECF No. 154). 21 Young now moves for an ordering authorizing a registered process server, rather than 22 the U.S. Marshal, to levy a writ of execution pursuant to California Code of Civil 23 Procedure § 669.080. 24 The execution of final judgments is governed by Federal Rule of Civil 25 Procedure (“Rule”) 69(a). Rule 69(a) states that “[a] money judgment is enforced by 26 a writ of execution, unless the court directs otherwise. The procedure on execution— 27 and in proceedings supplementary to and in aid of judgment or execution—must 28 1 accord with the procedure of the state where the court is located . . .” Fed. R. Civ. P. 2 69(a)(1); see also Credit Suisse v. U.S. Dist. Court for the Cent. Dist. Of California, 3 130 F.3d 1342, 1344 (9th Cir. 1997). Under California law, “[a] registered process 4 server may levy under a writ of execution” on the types of property listed in 5 California Civil Procedure Code § 699.080(a)(1)-(9). A registered process server is 6 a person registered as a process server pursuant to the Business and Professions Code. 7 Cal. Civ. Proc. Code § 481.250. Subsections 699.080(b)-(g) lay out the procedure by 8 which a registered process server must levy under a writ of execution. 9 The Court has reviewed the documents filed by Young and finds that 10 Nationwide Legal, LLC employs California registered process servers. The Court 11 finds that the interests of justice would be served by relieving the United States 12 Marshal from effectuating certain types of services necessary to effectuate collection 13 of judgment in this action. The Court finds that the use of a process server is routine 14 and authorized by California law. See Joe Hand Promotions, Inc. v. Villalobos, 2009 15 WL 4756613, at *2 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 8, 2009). 16 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 17 1. The Application is GRANTED; 18 2. Young may employ a registered private process server, specifically 19 identified as Nationwide Legal, LLC, who employs California registered process 20 servers over eighteen years of age and of suitable discretion, and who is not a party 21 to the action; 22 3. Nationwide Legal, LLC shall comply with the requirements of the 23 California Code of Civil Procedure concerning the enforcements of judgments, 24 including California Code of Civil Procedure § 699.080; and 25 4. The U.S. Marshal’s Office shall remain the levying officer for any Writ 26 of Execution entered in this action. 27 IT IS SO ORDERED. 28 1 || Dated: June 6, 2023 sale As c Hon. Gonzalo P. Curiel 3 United States District Judge A 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 _3-