Escrow on a Murrieta house is two weeks from closing when the title officer calls. An abstract of judgment is recorded against the seller, from a Riverside County case brought by a former supplier of her tile company. The default was entered in 2017. Nobody remembers a summons.
Is it too late? In 2026 that depends on the court. The nation’s highest court tightened the federal rule in January; California’s Supreme Court loosened the state rule in late 2024.
Why do California companies end up with default judgments they never knew about?
Usually the papers went where state records pointed. A corporation is served through its designated agent or an officer under Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 416.10, and it names that agent on the annual statement required by Cal. Corp. Code § 1502. LLCs file every two years under section 17702.09, and section 17701.16(b) says a new agent address is not “effective until” the statement is amended.
If the server cannot find the agent at the listed address, the court can order service on the Secretary of State under Corp. Code § 1702(a) (section 17701.16(c) for LLCs). That office then mails the papers to whatever principal office its records show. The most common cause of a surprise judgment I see is a registered-agent address nobody updated after the business moved.
How does an old default judgment surface, and how long can a creditor enforce it in California?
Late, through a bank levy, a garnished paycheck or a title report. Recording an abstract of judgment creates a real property lien under Code Civ. Proc. § 697.310 that lasts until ten years from entry of the judgment, not from recording. The abstract must show where the summons was served or mailed (§ 674(a)(3)), often the first clue.
A money judgment is enforceable for ten years (§ 683.020), renewable for ten more by an application filed before that period ends (§§ 683.120, 683.130), and a recorded renewal extends the lien (§ 683.180). Interest runs at 10 percent under section 685.010; the 5 percent rate added in 2023 covers certain medical and consumer judgments, not business debts.
Did a bank levy or a title report just show you a judgment you never knew about? The 180-day deadline in section 473.5 can start the day you are served with notice of the judgment, and courts now ask how fast you moved once you knew.
Is a California default judgment void if the company was never properly served?
Often. A default entered without statutory service “is void,” said Dill v. Berquist Construction Co., 24 Cal. App. 4th 1426, 1444 (1994), quoted in California Capital Ins. Co. v. Hoehn, 17 Cal. 5th 207 (2024).
Void on its face means the defect appears in the judgment roll, the default file itself (§ 670(a)), with no outside evidence. A proof of service under section 415.20(a) reciting no mailing is, in my reading, facially defective. A regular-looking proof naming a “person in charge” at a suite you had already left is void only once a lease and declarations prove the move. Most business cases are that second kind, and a proper section 1702 order may mean no defect at all.
How late is too late to set aside a default judgment in California state court?
Section 473(b) covers excusable neglect, “in no case exceeding six months.” Section 473.5 helps a validly served defendant who got no actual notice: file by the earlier of two years after entry or 180 days after written notice, swearing the lapse “was not caused by the party’s avoidance of service or inexcusable neglect.”
Section 473(d) reaches “any void judgment.” Facially void ones were always open to attack. For the rest, Rogers v. Silverman, 216 Cal. App. 3d 1114 (1989), and cases such as Trackman v. Kenney, 187 Cal. App. 4th 175 (2010), borrowed a two-year cap. Hoehn ended that. On a 2011 Placer County default the defendant said he first learned of through a 2020 wage garnishment, the Court held that “a section 473(d) motion to vacate a judgment that is void for lack of proper service is not subject to the judicially imposed two-year limitation,” disapproving Rogers “and its progeny.” Footnote 11 left open whether diligence after discovery is required; Kramer v. Traditional Escrow, Inc., 56 Cal. App. 5th 13, 37 (2020), measures it “from when a party discovers the default.” Hoehn moved within three months.
AB 747 (Stats. 2025, ch. 563) adds section 473.2 on January 1, 2027, making the plaintiff prove lawful service “by a preponderance of the evidence,” but AB 2042 (Stats. 2026, ch. 379) limits it to service attempted or completed from that date on. For a 2017 judgment, Evid. Code § 647 still presumes a registered server’s return accurate until you produce contrary evidence.
What did the Supreme Court decide in Coney Island, and does it reach federal judgments in California?
On January 20, 2026, a unanimous Court affirmed the Sixth Circuit in Coney Island Auto Parts Unlimited, Inc. v. Burton, No. 24-808, a bankruptcy default attacked only after a 2021 seizure. Justice Alito wrote: “We hold that this time limit applies to a motion alleging that a judgment is void.” Rule 60(c)(1)‘s reasonable-time requirement now governs voidness motions in federal court. Justice Sotomayor concurred only in the judgment.
The holding is narrow. The Court expressed “no view” on whether the service voided the judgment, left a reasonable time undefined, and reserved Rule 60(d) independent actions. It added that “it might be reasonable for a defendant not to seek relief before learning about a plaintiff’s attempted enforcement.” There was no remand.
This displaces Ninth Circuit law. Meadows v. Dominican Republic, 817 F.2d 517 (9th Cir. 1987), said “[t]here is no time limit on a Rule 60(b)(4) motion,” and SEC v. Internet Solutions for Business Inc., 509 F.3d 1161 (9th Cir. 2007), agreed, while holding that a defendant who knew of the suit must prove non-service and can overcome a signed return only by “strong and convincing evidence.” Through Fed. R. Bankr. P. 9024, the limit reaches bankruptcy court defaults too (creditors facing a filing should see my post on judgment creditors in Chapter 11). One irony: Hoehn’s footnote 10 leaned on the federal rule having no time limit. Expect creditors to cite Coney Island when pressing for a diligence rule.
What should a Murrieta owner do when escrow turns up a 2017 Riverside County judgment?
An illustrative case. Dana’s tile corporation moved from Riverside to Temecula in 2015 without updating its statement of information. In 2016 a supplier sued the company and Dana, as guarantor, in Riverside County Superior Court, serving the company through the Secretary of State and Dana by substituted service at the old suite. A $48,000 default was entered against both on March 14, 2017.
At 10 percent simple interest that is about $13.15 a day, roughly $46,000 by October 16, 2026 (payoff near $94,000 before costs). Enforceability ends in March 2027 unless renewed, and section 683.170 gives Dana 60 days after service of a renewal notice to challenge it.
The company’s realistic remedy was section 473.5, which closed in 2019. Dana has a Hoehn motion if she proves the suite was no longer her place of business and that no diligent personal-delivery attempts came first, as section 415.20(b) requires. Otherwise she can negotiate a payoff with escrow holding the disputed sum, or consider bankruptcy, where 11 U.S.C. § 522(f)(1)(A) lets a debtor avoid a judicial lien that impairs an exemption.
The week a judgment appears, I order the court file and read the proof of service line by line, then gather the Secretary of State history, the lease and declarations from whoever occupied the old suite. Each week after discovery is one a creditor will call unreasonable.
| Route | Time limit | What you must show | Burden | Typical proof |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Federal court, Rule 60(b)(4) | Reasonable time (Coney Island) | Judgment void, usually for bad service | Movant, if it knew of the suit | Docket, return, enforcement dates |
| § 473(d), void on its face | Any time | Defect visible in the judgment roll | Movant, record only | Summons, proof of service |
| § 473(d), void by outside evidence | No two-year cap (Hoehn); diligence unsettled | Service not made as statute requires | Movant rebuts § 647 presumption (pre-2027 service) | SOS history, lease, declarations |
| § 473.5, no actual notice | Earlier of 2 years or 180 days after notice | No notice, not your neglect or avoidance | Movant, sworn affidavit | Affidavit, proposed answer |
| § 473(b), excusable neglect | Six months at most | Mistake or excusable neglect | Movant | Declaration, proposed answer |
Frequently Asked Questions
Can a California default judgment be set aside after two years?
Yes, if improper service made it void. California Capital Ins. Co. v. Hoehn held that a section 473(d) motion is not subject to the two-year cap courts had borrowed from section 473.5. If you were validly served but never saw the papers, the section 473.5 deadlines still apply.
Does Coney Island apply to California superior court judgments?
No. It interprets Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60, so it governs federal district and bankruptcy court judgments. State judgments fall under the Code of Civil Procedure and Hoehn.
What if the summons was served on the California Secretary of State?
Court-ordered service there is valid if the plaintiff could not find your agent with reasonable diligence. The papers go to the principal office on file, so an outdated address means you may never see them, and the usual remedy is a section 473.5 motion.
How long does a judgment lien last on a California home?
Until ten years from the date the judgment was entered. If the creditor renews and records the renewal before the lien expires, it runs ten years from the renewal application.
Will the new SPARE Act help with an old judgment?
Probably not directly. AB 2042 limits the burden-shifting procedure in section 473.2 to service attempted or completed on or after January 1, 2027. Older judgments are decided under current law and Hoehn.
How North Star Law Firm Can Help
North Star Law Firm brings motions to vacate surprise judgments through its business and contract law practice, keeps agent records current through entity formation work, and handles cases where bankruptcy fits better. Phillip Zagotti is a California attorney and a CPA admitted to the U.S. District and Bankruptcy Courts for the Central District of California.
If a levy or title report just surfaced a surprise judgment, contact North Star Law Firm or schedule a consultation before the creditor renews it.