Comments on: Case of the Day: Feliz v. MacNeill

By: Case of the Day: Dr. Pepper Snapple Group v. Bebidas Purificadas de Tehuacan | Letters Blogatory

Mon, 18 Nov 2024 01:21:07 +0000

[…] vendor thought it necessary to have an order appointing it as a special process server. In my post on Feliz v. MacNeill, a 2012 First Circuit case, I noted that the Irish central authority had […]

By: Ted Folkman

Ted Folkman — Thu, 30 Aug 2012 22:38:19 +0000

In reply to Antonin I. Pribetic.

Thumbs up for Elvis!

Personal service is the gold standard, but a sine qua non? No way. Service by mail, with a signed acknowledgement of receipt, seems just as reliable to me. But anyway, my point was just about what’s permissible, not what’s preferable.

By: Antonin I. Pribetic

Antonin I. Pribetic — Thu, 30 Aug 2012 14:04:31 +0000

“Neither snow nor rain nor heat nor gloom of night stays these couriers from the swift completion of their appointed rounds.” United States Postal Service

I suppose you’ve never heard the expression, “the check is in the mail” or know about the “Dead Letter Office”? I always enjoyed Elvis Presley’s song “Return to Sender”.

Seriously, though, personal service of originating process is the sine qua non of procedural fairness; it creates certainty that the defendant had actual, not merely constructive, notice of a claim.