A party may seek expungement of a lis pendens on any of four grounds:   (1) the lis pendens is void and invalid for lack of service on all defendants and owners of the property (CCP § 405.23), (2) the action as pleaded does not contain a real property claim (CCP § 405.31), (3) the claimant fails to establish the probable validity of the claim (CCP § 405.32), and (4) monetary relief provides an adequate remedy (CCP § 405.33).  This decision holds that the trial court abused its discretion in expunging plaintiff’s lis pendens.  Plaintiff properly served the lis pendens on the general partnership that owned the property by mailing a copy to one of its partners since notice to one partner is notice to all and the partnership itself.  Also, only substantial compliance with the statutory service provisions is required.  And here, the service substantially complied because the notice was sent to the right address and to the person who acted for the partnership.  Addressing the notice to him as a officer of a related corporation did not detract from the notice since the statute’s purpose of affording the owner notice and an opportunity to move to quash the lis pendens was served.  The plaintiff also proved the probable validity of its claim that the defendant had breached a right of first refusal in plaintiff’s lease, by arranging to sell the property without offering plaintiff the opportunity to buy the leased premises at a price that was as favorable to the owner as the proportionate part of the third party’s offer to buy the bigger parcel of which it was a part.