Jones v. Halfacre CA2/7, B303380

In Nov. 2014 Jones sued Eric (Erik) Halfacre for conversion, fraud, breach of bailment and rescission after consigning jewelry (alleged value > $3.5M) and receiving a $400,000 advance; she claimed shortfall exceeding $1M.
Process server located Halfacre at a Corona del Mar residence in Dec. 2014 but could not personally serve him after prolonged surveillance; Jones applied for service by publication in Feb. 2015 and the court ordered publication in the Los Angeles Daily Journal.
Default was entered May 19, 2015; the court entered a default judgment June 8, 2015 for $3,202,299.50.
Halfacre moved in Apr. 2019 to set aside the default judgment (Code Civ. Proc. §§ 473(d), 473.5, 580(a)), claiming improper service by publication, lack of actual notice, and that the judgment exceeded damages pleaded; he later asserted extrinsic fraud/equity grounds in his reply.
The trial court denied relief as untimely under § 473.5 for challenges requiring extrinsic evidence, ruled the judgment was not void on its face (finding adequate diligence and likely mail notice), denied belated equitable relief for extrinsic fraud, and reduced the judgment to $1,071,066.62. Halfacre appealed; the Court of Appeal affirmed.

Issue	Jones's Argument	Halfacre's Argument	Held
1) Whether Halfacre’s §473(d) challenge was timely	Judgment not void on face; motion untimely under §473.5 for lack of actual-notice claims	§473(d) has no time limit for void judgments; his challenge is timely if judgment is void on its face	Motion untimely to extent it relied on extrinsic evidence; only facially void judgments may be attacked at any time
2) Whether default judgment was void on its face due to defective service by publication	Service by publication was valid; affidavits showed reasonable diligence	Publication order defective: affidavits lacked sufficient detail and Jones knew his Orange County address; newspaper choice improper	Judgment not void on its face; record (judgment roll) supported reasonable diligence and publication choice
3) Whether trial court should vacate judgment on equitable/extrinsic-fraud grounds	Relief unnecessary; procedures and timing not met	Jones misled court by stating other service impossible; extrinsic fraud warrants vacation and merits hearing	Court properly refused to consider belated extrinsic-fraud claim; on merits, substantial evidence supported finding Halfacre likely had notice, so no extrinsic fraud
4) Whether judgment exceeded pleaded damages	Jones conceded $1M award appropriate; court reduced judgment	Judgment for $3.2M exceeded definite allegations	Court modified judgment to approximately $1,071,066.62 before appeal

Cruz v. Fagor America, Inc., 146 Cal.App.4th 488 (trial court has discretion under §473(d) but no power to set aside non-void judgments)
Trackman v. Kenney, 187 Cal.App.4th 175 (when lack-of-service invalidity shown only by extrinsic evidence, relief is subject to §473.5 timing)
Pittman v. Beck Park Apartments Ltd., 20 Cal.App.5th 1009 (distinguishes facially void orders from those invalidated only by extrinsic evidence)
OC Interior Services, LLC v. Nationstar Mortgage, LLC, 7 Cal.App.5th 1318 (limitations on attacking judgments depending on whether void on face)
Olvera v. Olvera, 232 Cal.App.3d 32 (service by publication invalid where affidavit lacked reasonable diligence and paper choice did not reach defendant)
Rappleyea v. Campbell, 8 Cal.4th 975 (equitable relief from default judgment available only in exceptional circumstances; elements for extrinsic fraud relief)