In an unlawful detainer action in which the defendant filed a motion to quash contending she was not properly served with the three-day notice to pay rent or quit in a manner prescribed by law. She included evidence the notice was left on the ground in an unmarked envelope on the side of her apartment unit. The trial court denied the motion to quash, twice, once before and once after an alternative writ of mandate was issued directing the court to either vacate its order denying the motion to quash service of summons and complaint or show cause why a preemptory writ should not issue. The second time around, the trial court determined the proper scope and standard of a motion to quash is the same as that of a demurrer and therefore limited to challenging the sufficiency of the pleadings. Defendant asked the appellate division of the superior court to rule that a trial court may consider extrinsic evidence in support of a motion to quash. The appellate division granted a writ of mandate, stating: “Affidavits and declarations contained in the motion to quash together with the verified complaint may be competent evidence sufficient for the trial court to determine the jurisdictional issues raised by the motion.” (Borsuk v. Sup. Ct. (La Hillcreste Apartments, LLC) (Cal. Super. Ct.; July 22, 2015) 238 Cal.App.4th Supp. 1, [190 Cal.Rptr.3d 529].)
