Skip to main content
DRAFT FOR ATTORNEY REVIEW — NOT FINAL

Fernandes v. Singh, 224 Cal. Rptr. 3d 751 (2017)

Citation
Fernandes v. Singh, 224 Cal. Rptr. 3d 751 (2017)
Parent Document
Fernandes v. Singh, 224 Cal. Rptr. 3d 751 (2017)
Jurisdiction
California (state)
Effective Date
2017-10-05

Other Sections in This Document (61)

Full Text

1,084 chars
Later, and represented by counsel, Rawat, individually and in her capacity as a trustee of the Trust, filed a formal motion to vacate the judgment as "void" due to lack of service. In support, Rawat filed a new declaration alleging she was the only trustee of the Trust; the facts stated in the proof of service (at the Sacramento County courthouse) were not correct because she was never served at any point; she was never "mailed any information about this case"; she first learned of this case from Singh on June 10, 2015, after *939the adverse judgment; and she had been "legally separated" from Singh since 2005 (thereby conceding she was still married to him). Rawat also alleged that Singh had no authority to accept service for the trust, she had never hired Oliver to represent the Trust (but she did not explicitly declare that she had not hired Oliver to represent her ), she had not executed any documents in the case, and she "never had any conversations about the litigation" with Oliver. No documents corroborating her alleged legal separation from Singh were provided.