Case of the Day: In re Skyport Global Communications

The case of the day is CenturyTel, Inc. v. Schermerhorn (In re Skyport Global Communications, Inc. (S.D. Tex. 2015). The case was a complicated bankruptcy dispute that I won’t attempt to summarize. One of the parties in an adversary proceeding in the Bankruptcy Court sought to serve a party, Wilson Vukelich LLP, in Canada. Service was effected via the Hague Service Convention, but the Article 6 certificate stated that service had been made by delivering the documents to Wilson Vukelich’s receptionist. The Bankruptcy Court granted Wilson Vukelich’s motion to dismiss for insufficient service of process, and the other party, Schermerhorn, appealed to the District Court.

On the one hand, Wilson Vukelich argued that service on the receptionist was not proper under Ontario law. (It may be that this was so, though it was apparently at least an arguable point). On the other hand, Schermerhorn had proceeded under Article 5 of the Hague Service Convention, that is, he had asked the Canadian (or Ontario) central authority to serve the papers on his behalf, and the central authority had returned an Article 6 certificate stating that service had been made.

As we know, a central authority’s Article 6 certification at least is prima facie evidence that service has been effected. And the judge in Skyport recognized several cases adopting that rule. But oddly, he then wrote that Schermerhorn had “failed to cite the Bankruptcy Court to any authority supporting their argument that the Certificate from the Canadian Central Authority was sufficient to prove that service had been made in compliance with the Hague Convention and local Canadian law.”

It seems to me that the right answer in such a case is to give the Article 6 certificate prima facie effect. The certificate should relieve the plaintiff from having to prove that the service was effected in accordance with the foreign law. It’s not clear to me why the judge didn’t take that approach here, particularly as he was aware of the cases holding that that’s just what he ought to do.

About Ted Folkman

Ted Folkman is a shareholder with Murphy & King, a Boston law firm, where he has a complex business litigation practice. He is the author of International Judicial Assistance (MCLE 2d ed. 2016), a nuts-and-bolts guide to international judicial assistance issues, and of the chapter on service of process in the ABA's forthcoming treatise on International Aspects of US Litigation, and he is the publisher of Letters Blogatory, the Web's first blog devoted to international judicial assistance, which the ABA recognized as one of the best 100 legal blogs in 2012, 2014, and 2015.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *