Thomas J. Baker Properly Served

Here is another set of email correspondence between me and Defendant, Thomas J. Baker. Since I sent my email response to him yesterday, I have not heard another word from him. As in his previous email, it appears in my opinion that he is being directed by Santa Monica College's legal counsel, Robert Sammis. Defendants often use delaying tactics to forestall answering a civil complaint in court. You can read our previous email correspondence HERE.

-- Des Manttari,
Editor-in-Chief,
Phoenix Genesis

(c) 2006: Phoenix Genesis/MBS LP

---------------------- MY EMAIL TO THOMAS BAKER ----------------------

ATTENTION: THOMAS J. BAKER

August 4, 2006

RE: SERVICE OF SUMMONS AND COMPLAINT

Dear Tom:

I have again spoken with my process server who indicates that you were properly served and is willing to testify in Court to this effect. To reiterate my previous response to you, you were personally served at your residence at approximately 9:15 pm on Wednesday, August 2, 2006 with both a conformed copy of the summons and verified complaint for damages as well as the verification and attached exhibits.

The process server knocked on your door and an older woman who appeared to be your mother answered. The process server asked for "Thomas J. Baker," and your mother went inside your bedroom and brought you to the door. You had a brief conversation with the process server. Although your mother told you, "You don't have to accept that," or words to that effect, the process server indicated that you were served and dropped the summons and complaint at your feet. The process server thereafter personally witnessed you pick up the summons and complaint from the ground.

There is no requirement under California law that you sign any documents accepting or acknowledging personal service. Again, by virtue of your two emails to me, you have acknowledged that you were served. The proof of service will be filed with the Court. If you wish to challenge the service, then I will ask the Court for sanctions as your motion is frivolous, without merit, and merely a delaying tactic in this matter.

Although you indicated in your last email that you were retaining an attorney and "will provide you with his information shortly," I have yet to receive such information.

Very Truly Yours,
Des Manttari

----------------------- THOMAS BAKER'S EMAIL TO ME -----------------------

Thomas Baker thomasjbake@yahoo.com wrote:

Like I said, I did not receive any documents. They were dropped in front of my door which is not an applicable method of being served in a legal matter.

I provided no acceptance of service which is required in a legal matter. If you wish to file a proof of service without acceptance, that is your preregotive [sic].

I will be retaining a lawyer and will provide you with his information shortly.

Best regards,
Thomas J. Baker

Feel free to link or print this; just include the SAVE SMC URL: http://savesmc.blogspot.com/

Technorati Tags: Santa Monica College, Thomas J. Baker, California Code of Civil Procedure, Thomas Baker, legal, verified complaint, service of summons, Los Angeles Superior Court, lawsuit, libel, News and politics, slander, Robert Sammis