Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The process server is proof that papers have been served. But he has to physically see the person who responded to identification, like "Hi, Mr John Doe?", "Yes?", "Here is a letter for you", legally, the process server can only drop the letter to the defendant's feet as long as they have been identified.
If unable to serve, the court can decide that any adult 18 or older can do so, if it makes access to the defendant easier.
That is not true for housing/civil court. I've seen dozens of "You are being sued" notices plastered onto front of buildings, in lobbies, and or apartment doors.
In fact since eviction moratorium was lifted in NY I've seen plenty of three day notices and court summons for non-payment proceedings plastered on same.
Again as posted above link clearly spells out there are at least three ways for housing (and other civil court) action petitions to be served upon plaintiff.
While personal service may be desired goal, if that isn't possible (and often is not) one monkey don't stop no show; as law provides two other methods of service, Substituted delivery and Conspicuous Place delivery.
Think about it; people who have received three day notices or otherwise made aware they will be hauled into court unless a matter is settled know who is knocking on their door early in morning. This or simply will ask "who is it?", peep through keyhole or intercom camera; once process server identifies him or her self, that's all she wrote, defendant may not answer/open door. It's like people behind on their car note parking vehicle several blocks from their home in hopes that will throw off repossession man. That doesn't work either...
Now divorce court, yes there papers must be served personally upon defendant.
I understand that the verbiage may not exactly fit but look at it this way. If a person has filled out the sworn statement claiming that they served a defendant in a court action, then that defendant is going to have to prove that they weren't served or simply appear. Otherwise, the proceeding may happen without them.
I dealt with this exact issue a hell of a lot when I was the domestic violence sergeant. I dealt with plenty of people claiming they had not been served. In the end, if they could not prove it, the case either went on without them or they decided to produce themselves regardless.
If a person has filled out the sworn statement claiming that they served a defendant in a court action, then that defendant is going to have to prove that they weren't served or simply appear.
Makes no sense.
Man says he served papers, you say you say he didn't.
There may be ways he can prove he DID serve them but there is no way for you to PROVE he didn't.
Trusting the veracity of the deliverer, even iof sworn to a blood oath on his children's heads does not make iot a fact.
There is simply NO WAY to prove the deliverer was a liar, even if he was.
It's like registered mail which shows PROOF OF MAILING, but not PROOF OF RECEIPT.
Yeah I get it, but that’s how it is. I’m not guessing here. It’s a quirk in the process that can be abused by liars as long as they are willing to swear that they personally served someone.
Ideally, the ancient rules governing process serving will be updated to eliminate this possibility.
For what it is worth, it’s not impossible to defend against this. The person has to say where and when they served you. If it is a complete lie, the respondent may be able to prove they were somewhere else at the time, no different than when defending against criminal charges.
Our system convinces people that defendants never have to actually defend, but it’s hogwash. They’re called defendants for a reason.
System has worked for hundreds of years, which in of itself speaks volumes.
As stated previously if some eejit goes to court and tells judge he wasn't served properly it only delays things, not cancel. At best whatever default judgment was rendered will be vacated, and case restored to calendar for trial. Someone can't pull same stunt twice, so whatever they were hoping to nullify or gain from claiming improper service won't be very large. In end justice will out.
Courts give great weight and deference to officers of court and so forth. If worse comes to worse and judge puts every GD person under oath first thing out of gate is "why would process server lie?" Unless there is some sort of corruption or whatever person serving legal papers has no vested interest in not carrying out assignment.
Suppose if it came to light more than one such complaint was made, then yes, something might be up. Indeed lawyers and others wouldn't employ such person with suspect record.
It's like jury duty notices; court clerks have heard every GD excuse under sun for why people failed to respond, this included "I never received summons...". In end such persons can (and often are) put before a judge to under oath give their reasoning.
Both perjury and contempt of court are serious matters. Thus I don't believe anyone with an ounce of sense will knowingly try to pull a fast one, or **** off a judge over some kindergarten BS.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
