Sternberg v. Hendrickson

Background

Michael C. Sternberg, proceeding without an attorney and on behalf of himself and his two children, E.W. and N.W., sued dozens of defendants based on their alleged roles in a child custody dispute involving E.W. and N.W. The motion addressed service on Sherry Diamond and the Santa Clara County Bar Association, which Sternberg called the SCCBA.

Sternberg asked for permission to serve Diamond and the SCCBA by email to Diamond’s SCCBA email address. He stated that Diamond had not responded to a request to waive service or follow-up emails, and that a process server had been unable to serve her during one attempt at noon on a weekday at her last known address, which appeared vacant. He also asserted that Diamond had evaded service in earlier litigation, although she was eventually served personally in that matter.

Analysis

The court explained that alternative service by email may be allowed when a plaintiff has shown reasonable diligence and email is reasonably calculated to give the defendants actual notice. The court assumed, without deciding, that use of Diamond’s SCCBA email address would reasonably provide actual notice to both Diamond and the organization.

The court nevertheless found that Sternberg’s efforts did not demonstrate reasonable diligence. Although he sent one email requesting a waiver of service and two follow-up emails, the process server made only one attempt at a vacant address. Sternberg made no additional attempts beyond email and that single failed personal-service attempt to determine Diamond’s current address. He also made no effort to obtain information, other than Diamond’s address, that might have allowed proper service on the SCCBA. The court concluded that these efforts did not amount to the thorough, systematic investigation needed to authorize email service.

Ruling

Judge Araceli Martinez-Olguin denied Sternberg’s motion for alternative service.