California SB 85: Electronic Service of Process Now Allowed in Certain Cases (2026)
By Erwin Galura
California SB 85: What Process Servers Need to Know About Electronic Service of Process
By Michael Reid, Lead Editor at Process Server Daily | CEO of 123 Legal Inc.
Published: March 10, 2026 | Updated: August 5, 2026
California has officially entered a new era of civil procedure. Effective January 1, 2026, Senate Bill 85 (SB 85) authorizes California courts to permit electronic service of process, including service by email or other electronic means, when a plaintiff has demonstrated that traditional service methods have been exhausted.
While the legislation introduces a modern alternative for difficult-to-serve defendants, it does not replace personal service. Instead, it creates a court-supervised option that may be used only after plaintiffs establish reasonable diligence in attempting traditional methods of service.
For process servers, attorneys, law firms, and litigants, understanding the requirements of SB 85 is essential. Here's everything you need to know.
Key Takeaways
California SB 85 became effective on January 1, 2026.
Courts may authorize electronic service of a summons by email or other electronic means.
Electronic service is available only after traditional methods have been attempted without success.
Plaintiffs must demonstrate reasonable diligence before requesting court approval.
A judge must determine that electronic service is reasonably likely to provide actual notice.
The law does not apply to actions involving government entities or government employees.
Professional process servers remain a critical part of the service process.
What Is California SB 85?
California Senate Bill 85 modernizes the state's service of process laws by allowing courts to authorize service through electronic means when conventional methods have proven unsuccessful.
Historically, California required plaintiffs to rely on traditional service methods such as:
Personal service
Substituted service
Service by mail (when authorized)
Other statutory methods provided under the California Code of Civil Procedure
Under the new law, plaintiffs who cannot successfully serve a defendant using these traditional methods may petition the court for permission to complete service electronically.
This change reflects the growing reality that many individuals communicate primarily through digital platforms, making electronic service more practical in limited circumstances.
Electronic Service Is Not the First Option
One of the biggest misconceptions about SB 85 is that lawsuits can now be served by email immediately.
That is not the case.
Electronic service is considered a last-resort option.
Before requesting permission from the court, plaintiffs must demonstrate that they made genuine, documented efforts to complete service through every available statutory method.
Courts will carefully evaluate whether reasonable efforts were made before approving electronic service.
What Does "Reasonable Diligence" Mean?
Reasonable diligence is the foundation of SB 85.
Plaintiffs must present evidence showing they made multiple legitimate attempts to locate and personally serve the defendant.
This may include:
Multiple visits to residential addresses
Attempts at business addresses
Service at known workplaces
Contacting known locations where the defendant may be found
Attempts using substituted service where permitted
Documenting unsuccessful mail service
Investigating updated addresses when appropriate
Every attempt should be thoroughly documented with:
Dates
Times
Locations
Observations
Outcomes
These records become critical evidence supporting a motion for electronic service.
How the Court Approves Electronic Service
Electronic service cannot be used without judicial approval.
The typical process includes:
Step 1: Traditional Service Attempts
The plaintiff hires a professional process server who attempts service through every available legal method.
Step 2: Documentation
Each unsuccessful attempt is carefully documented in declarations or affidavits demonstrating reasonable diligence.
Step 3: Motion to the Court
The plaintiff files a motion requesting authorization for electronic service.
Step 4: Judicial Review
The judge reviews whether traditional methods were exhausted and whether electronic service is reasonably likely to provide actual notice.
Step 5: Court Authorization
If approved, service may proceed through email or another approved electronic method.
Practical Example
Imagine a defendant who has moved multiple times without updating public records.
A professional process server:
Attempts service at three residential addresses
Visits the defendant's workplace
Performs evening and weekend attempts
Conducts skip tracing
Attempts substituted service where appropriate
Despite these efforts, the defendant cannot be located.
However, the plaintiff has a verified email address the defendant regularly uses for business communications.
The plaintiff files a motion with detailed documentation of every unsuccessful attempt.
If the judge determines that the email address is reasonably likely to provide actual notice, electronic service may be authorized under SB 85.
What SB 85 Means for Process Servers
Contrary to some concerns, SB 85 does not reduce the need for professional process servers.
In many cases, it actually increases their importance.
Courts rely heavily on documentation prepared by experienced process servers to determine whether reasonable diligence has been satisfied.
Professional process servers provide:
Detailed service logs
Time-stamped service attempts
Photographs where appropriate
Affidavits of non-service
Due diligence declarations
Evidence supporting motions for alternative service
Without this documentation, courts are unlikely to approve electronic service.
Benefits of the New Law
SB 85 offers several potential advantages for California's legal system.
Faster Resolution
Cases involving evasive defendants may proceed more efficiently once traditional methods have been exhausted.
Reduced Litigation Costs
Repeated unsuccessful service attempts can become expensive.
Electronic service may reduce unnecessary delays after diligent efforts have failed.
Improved Access to Justice
Plaintiffs with legitimate claims are less likely to have cases stalled indefinitely due to defendants avoiding service.
Modernized Civil Procedure
The legislation reflects how communication has evolved in today's digital environment.
Limitations of SB 85
Although the law represents a significant modernization, important safeguards remain.
Electronic service:
Requires prior court approval
Cannot replace personal service whenever personal service is reasonably possible
Must be reasonably calculated to provide actual notice
Does not apply to lawsuits against government entities or government employees
Depends on documented evidence of reasonable diligence
These safeguards help protect defendants' constitutional due process rights.
A Growing National Trend
California is not the only jurisdiction modernizing service of process procedures.
Several recent legislative developments demonstrate a nationwide trend toward improving efficiency while maintaining fairness.
Ohio
Ohio has amended Civil Rule 4(D) to permit defendants in the Court of Common Pleas to waive service under procedures outlined in Rule 4.7.
The goal is to reduce delays and unnecessary litigation costs associated with certified mail service.
Federal Courts
Effective December 1, 2025, the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure introduced Rule 16.1, establishing procedures for multidistrict litigation management for the first time.
Although not directly related to service of process, the rule reflects continued modernization of federal civil procedure.
Virginia
Virginia's SB 189, passed on March 6, 2026, increases transparency in consumer debt collection lawsuits by requiring attorneys to include their full name, business address, and telephone number on every filing.
Failure to comply within 21 days may result in filings being stricken by the court.
Together, these developments demonstrate that legislatures and courts across the country continue refining procedural rules to improve fairness, transparency, and judicial efficiency.
Why Staying Informed Matters
Service of process laws continue to evolve as technology changes and courts seek more efficient ways to balance due process with practical realities.
Process servers who stay informed about legislative updates are better equipped to:
Maintain compliance
Produce stronger documentation
Support attorneys in complex cases
Improve service success rates
Adapt to future legal changes
Understanding new laws like SB 85 positions legal professionals to provide better service while remaining compliant with evolving procedural requirements.
Frequently Asked Questions
Can a summons now be served by email in California?
Only after a court authorizes electronic service. Plaintiffs must first demonstrate reasonable diligence using traditional service methods.
Does SB 85 eliminate personal service?
No. Personal service remains the preferred method whenever it can reasonably be accomplished.
Who decides whether electronic service is allowed?
A judge must review the evidence and determine whether electronic service is reasonably calculated to provide actual notice.
Does SB 85 apply to every lawsuit?
No. The law does not apply to actions involving government entities or government employees.
Why are process servers still important?
Professional process servers create the documentation courts rely on when determining whether traditional service methods have been exhausted.
Can electronic service include methods other than email?
Yes. The statute allows courts to authorize email or other electronic means when appropriate and approved by the court.
Conclusion
California SB 85 marks an important step toward modernizing service of process while preserving the due process protections that remain fundamental to the legal system.
Rather than replacing traditional service, the law provides courts with an additional tool for cases where diligent efforts have failed. For attorneys, process servers, and legal professionals, success under SB 85 depends on thorough documentation, careful compliance, and a clear understanding of the court's requirements.
As more states consider similar legislation, staying informed about procedural changes will remain a competitive advantage for professionals involved in civil litigation.
Sources & Further Reading:
California SB 85 — Full Bill Text (LegiScan)
Ohio Civil Rules Amendments (Cincinnati Bar Association)
Federal Rule Updates (U.S. Courts)
Virginia SB189 — Full Bill (Virginia Legislative Information System)
Stay sharp. Stay informed. Live Mighty!
Read the full article at www.mightyprocessserver.com
This article is published by Process Server Daily, powered by MightyAutomation.ai, the leader in legal support intelligence.