Originally published by David Coale.
Daigrepont v. Preuss reversed a default judgment for failure to comply with an order authorizing substituted service under Tex. R. Civ. P. 106(b).
- “The trial court’s order required ‘the Citation, First Amended Petition, initial discovery requests, and this Order’ be left with a person over the age of 16 or by leaving the documents on the front door of Daigrepont’s residence. It further required ‘a copy of the Citation, Petition, initial discovery requests, and this Order’ be mailed by certified mail, return receipt requested and by regular mail.”
- However: “The return of service affidavits indicate the process server posted the citation, plaintiff’s original petition, civil case information sheet, and order granting plaintiff’s motion for substitute service to his front door and mailed the
aforementioned documents per the court’s order.”
“By failing to strictly follow the order, Preuss violated rule 106(b). Violation of rule 106(b) makes service of process invalid and of no effect.” No. 05-18-01271-CV (May 17, 2019) (mem. op.)
Curated by Texas Bar Today. Follow us on Twitter @texasbartoday.
from Texas Bar Today http://bit.ly/2W9Z2qb
via Abogado Aly Website
No comments:
Post a Comment