
(TL;DR… publication is a horrible, terrible, woefully insufficient means of service, and the Supreme Court said so way back in 1950. It should only be used as a last resort, and even then, only when there’s a reasonable chance that it’ll actually notify anybody that a case is afoot.)
A story flooded my news feed last Friday… US Judge Orders a Mexican Drug Cartel to Pay $1.5 Billion to Victims’ Families. A default for a billion and a half bucks ($4.6B after it’s trebled) is almost real money in this day & age, so I got curious about the procedural posture of the case. Because I live in civ-pro, several questions popped into my head, first among them being “who got sued?” (with a bit of incredulity).
Continue Reading Publication, 4(f)(3), and Mexican Cartels

As a general rule, I don’t talk to litigants. Even if their lawyer consents or hops on the call with us. Sure, the litigant is the guy paying my fee, but his lawyer is my client, and I’m not about to get in the middle of their relationship. Besides, it’s always a terrible idea to give a litigant control over something that is a lawyer’s ethical obligation.
No. No, no no… NO.
No. No, no no… NO.
No. No, no no… NO.



