← California State Legislature · All bills
AB 747
Service of Process Accountability, Reform and Equity (SPARE) Act.
Assembly · Other
What this bill does
This bill would, beginning January 1, 2027, require that the register of process servers maintained by a county clerk be publicly available. By imposing a new duty on county clerks, the bill would create a state-mandated local program. …
Read the full official summary
(1) Existing law requires a natural person who, for specific compensation, makes more than 10 services of process within the state in one calendar year, or a corporation or partnership that derives compensation from service of process within the state, to file and maintain a verified certificate of registration as a process server with the county clerk of the county in which the person, corporation, or partnership resides or has its principal place of business, except as specified. Existing law requires each county clerk to maintain a register of process servers and assign a number and issue an identification card to each process server.
This bill would, beginning January 1, 2027, require that the register of process servers maintained by a county clerk be publicly available. By imposing a new duty on county clerks, the bill would create a state-mandated local program.
(2) Existing law provides that a service of a summons in a civil action that complies with specified procedures is not invalid or ineffective solely because it was made by a person in violation of the requirements pertaining to registered process servers. Existing law provides that if a copy of the summons and complaint cannot with reasonable diligence be personally delivered to the person to be served, the summons may be served by leaving a copy at the person's dwelling house, usual place of abode, usual place of business, or usual mailing address, in the presence of a person who is at least 18 years of age, and by thereafter mailing a copy of the summons and complaint as specified. Existing law also authorizes a summons in an action for unlawful detainer to be served by posting if the court is satisfied that the party to be served cannot with reasonable diligence be served in any authorized manner other than publication, and that other specified conditions are met. Existing law requires the proof of service of a summons to contain specified information and documentation.
This bill would define "reasonable diligence," for purposes of service of process in specified civil cases, to mean attempting personal delivery of the summons and complaint, in good faith, on at least three occasions on three different days at three different times. The bill would require the proof of service of a summons and complaint, if served personally, by substituted service, or by posting, if the summons is for an action for unlawful detainer of real property, to include at least one photograph, if such can be obtained without compromising the safety of the process server, of the site of the effectuated or attempted service and contain a readable stamp and global positioning system (GPS) coordinates indicating the date, time, and location of service. The bill would require the process server to provide a detailed statement on the proof of service, as specified, if there is no GPS or cellular signal available at the time and place of the effected or attempted service. The bill would make these requirements operative on January 1, 2027.
(3) Existing law authorizes a court, on motion of a party and after notice to the other party, to set aside any void judgment or order.
This bill would authorize a party that did not receive proper service of the summons and complaint to bring a motion to set aside or vacate a default or default judgment or for leave to defend the action or to move for dismissal. The bill would require a party that files a motion to set aside or vacate a default or default judgment to proffer evidence that service of the summons and complaint was not effected. The bill would provide that the party seeking the default or default judgment has the burden of proving, by a preponderance of the evidence, that service was lawful. The bill would require the court to take evidence and would require the court to conduct a hearing and receive oral testimony if requested by either party. The bill would specify that the above provisions would not limit any other available remedies under the law. The bill would make these provisions operative on January 1, 2027.
(4) Existing law prescribes requirements for civil actions for unlawful detainer filed by landlords to remove tenants from their properties. Existing law requires that certain information be included in the complaint for unlawful detainer, including the method used to serve the defendant with the notice of termination of tenancy.
This bill would additionally require the complaint to include information describing the date, time, and location of effected service of the termination notice. The bill would make this requirement operative on January 1, 2027.
(5) The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement.
This bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to the statutory provisions noted above.
Official summary from the Legislative Counsel’s office, via OpenStates.
Floor votes (3)
June 4, 2025 — Third reading vote
Passed · 59 yes · 13 no · 7 other
Yes (59): Dawn Addis, Cecilia Aguiar-Curry, Patrick Ahrens, David Alvarez, Joaquin Arambula, Rebecca Bauer-Kahan, Steve Bennett, Marc Berman, Blanca Rubio, Tasha Boerner, Mia Bonta, Isaac Bryan, Lisa Calderon, Jessica Caloza, Juan Carrillo, Celeste Rodriguez, Damon Connolly, Sade Elhawary, Mike Fong, Jesse Gabriel, Robert Garcia, Mike Gipson, Matt Haney, John Harabedian, Gregg Hart, Jacqui Irwin, Corey Jackson, Ash Kalra, Maggy Krell, Alex Lee, Josh Lowenthal, Mark González, Tina McKinnor, Michelle Rodriguez, Al Muratsuchi, Stephanie Nguyen, Liz Ortega, Blanca Pacheco, Diane Papan, Darsh Patel, Gail Pellerin, Cottie Petrie-Norris, Sharon Quirk-Silva, James Ramos, Rhodesia Ransom, Robert Rivas, Chris Rogers, Pilar Schiavo, Nick Schultz, LaShae Sharp-Collins, José Solache, Esmeralda Soria, Catherine Stefani, Avelino Valencia, Chris Ward, Buffy Wicks, Lori Wilson, Rick Zbur, Anamarie Ávila Farías
No (13): Juan Alanis, Leticia Castillo, Laurie Davies, Carl DeMaio, Stan Ellis, James Gallagher, Heather Hadwick, Joshua Hoover, Ali Macedo, Joe Patterson, Kate Sanchez, David Tangipa, Greg Wallis
Other / no vote recorded (7): Jasmeet Bains, Phillip Chen, Diane Dixon, Heath Flora, Jeff Gonzalez, Tom Lackey, Tri Ta
Official motion wording
AB 747 Kalra Assembly Third Reading
Official record: leginfo.legislature.ca.gov
September 9, 2025 — Third reading vote
Passed · 30 yes · 10 no
Yes (30): Ben Allen, Bob Archuleta, Jesse Arreguín, Angelique Ashby, Josh Becker, Catherine Blakespear, Christopher Cabaldon, Anna Caballero, Sabrina Cervantes, Dave Cortese, María Elena Durazo, Lena Gonzalez, Tim Grayson, Melissa Hurtado, John Laird, Monique Limón, Mike McGuire, Jerry McNerney, Caroline Menjivar, Steve Padilla, Sasha Pérez, Eloise Reyes, Laura Richardson, Susan Rubio, Lola Smallwood-Cuevas, Henry Stern, Tom Umberg, Aisha Wahab, Akilah Weber Pierson, Scott Wiener
No (10): Marie Alvarado-Gil, Steve Choi, Megan Dahle, Shannon Grove, Brian Jones, Roger Niello, Rosilicie Ochoa Bogh, Kelly Seyarto, Tony Strickland, Suzette Valladares
Official motion wording
3rd Reading AB747 Kalra By Umberg
Official record: leginfo.legislature.ca.gov
September 11, 2025 — Concurrence vote
Passed · 55 yes · 20 no · 5 other
Yes (55): Dawn Addis, Cecilia Aguiar-Curry, Patrick Ahrens, David Alvarez, Joaquin Arambula, Rebecca Bauer-Kahan, Steve Bennett, Marc Berman, Blanca Rubio, Tasha Boerner, Mia Bonta, Isaac Bryan, Lisa Calderon, Jessica Caloza, Juan Carrillo, Celeste Rodriguez, Damon Connolly, Sade Elhawary, Mike Fong, Jesse Gabriel, Robert Garcia, Mike Gipson, Matt Haney, John Harabedian, Gregg Hart, Jacqui Irwin, Corey Jackson, Ash Kalra, Maggy Krell, Alex Lee, Josh Lowenthal, Mark González, Tina McKinnor, Al Muratsuchi, Liz Ortega, Diane Papan, Darsh Patel, Gail Pellerin, Cottie Petrie-Norris, Sharon Quirk-Silva, Rhodesia Ransom, Robert Rivas, Chris Rogers, Pilar Schiavo, Nick Schultz, LaShae Sharp-Collins, José Solache, Esmeralda Soria, Catherine Stefani, Avelino Valencia, Chris Ward, Buffy Wicks, Lori Wilson, Rick Zbur, Anamarie Ávila Farías
No (20): Juan Alanis, Leticia Castillo, Phillip Chen, Laurie Davies, Carl DeMaio, Diane Dixon, Stan Ellis, Heath Flora, James Gallagher, Heather Hadwick, Joshua Hoover, Jeff Gonzalez, Natasha Johnson, Tom Lackey, Ali Macedo, Joe Patterson, Kate Sanchez, Tri Ta, David Tangipa, Greg Wallis
Other / no vote recorded (5): Jasmeet Bains, Michelle Rodriguez, Stephanie Nguyen, Blanca Pacheco, James Ramos
Official motion wording
AB 747 Kalra Concurrence in Senate Amendments
Official record: leginfo.legislature.ca.gov