Yet another “FAQ” post, if you will…
“Hey, Aaron, the complaint is under seal, and the judge has ordered me to instruct the process server that he’s under the same obligation as I am.”
I respond: Well, that’s all fine and good, if you’re using private agent service in a country that would enforce the seal. But Article 5 service via a Central Authority? In a word, fugghetaboutit. Once this thing goes overseas, all bets are off. Continue Reading Hague service and documents under seal.
Squarely in the heart of the Caribbean Sea lies an island that has played host to countless movies, spring break junkets, and movies about spring break junkets. The mere mention of Jamaica conjures images of Bob Marley, cabanas under palm trees, and scantily clad beachgoers who have escaped the frigid northern winter. And lots of tour packages… which naturally leads to lots of litigation.
Jamaica is not party to the Hague Service Convention (HSC), although it has acceded to the Hague Apostille and Child Abduction Conventions. Notwithstanding its absence from the HSC, serving documents in Jamaica is relatively straightforward, owing to its status as a former British colony and current member of the Commonwealth of Nations. It maintains a healthy common law system, so it should not be unfamiliar to American or Canadian* lawyers. Continue Reading How to Serve Process in Jamaica
Back when dinosaurs roamed the earth, I took Civil Procedure from a couple of highly talented professors. One was among my favorite teachers of all time— he taught the concept of joinder with a shopping bag full of Beanie Babies™ and, for some baffling reason, a Jessie the Cowgirl™ doll from Toy Story 2.* On the surface, that’s a very weird thing for a licensed attorney to put into a blog post, but the fact is, generations of JD’s from the University of Missouri-Kansas City know joinder cold because of Jeffrey Berman’s frequent flier card at Toys ‘R’ Us. Third-party claims, cross-claims, counterclaims? Yeah, we got this.
That said, due to the compressed nature of that semester, and the reality that you just can’t learn everything you need to know as a 1L, we never really touched on certain basic concepts. Like “how do you serve process?” or “why is the judge such a grumpy gus and how do I assuage his ire?” or “is it too late to get my LSAT fee back?” Continue Reading Subpoena: both a sword and a shield.
A routine question from clients across the continent– especially those in my own state*: “Hey, Aaron, the clerk says I have to tell the court who is going to be serving the documents in China or they won’t issue my summons. Could you get me the process server’s name and qualifications so they can appoint him?”
There’s a lot loaded into that, with some compelling responses. The primary response: No… you and I don’t get to know that. Continue Reading No, the U.S. court doesn’t get to appoint a process server overseas.
A new quandary popped up for me recently, one that I hope is just a matter of a stressed-out government employee* who’s been dealing with a lot over the past two years. Last month, a client called me because he needed to serve a defendant in Sweden. No problem, said I, as long as you have a valid address, we should be good to go. He engaged me, and we were just about ready to rock & roll with the Hague Request, but before I pulled the trigger on the translation, I said I needed an issued summons. No dice, said he. He had been told by the court clerk that he had to submit the translated version of the complaint before a summons would be issued.
Continue Reading Sorry, court clerks—you don’t have the authority to review translations.
Client queries: “hey, Aaron, the clerk says the Hague Service Convention requires certified copies of the Summons and Complaint and something called an Apostille. Where do I get that?”
I get some variant of that question pretty regularly, most often from colleagues within just a few miles of me.*
For starters… no, the Hague Service Convention says nothing of the sort.** Continue Reading Certified copies? Nope. Not needed.
The most common question I get, aside from “how much is this going to cost?” and “how long will this take?” is this:
Continue Reading Governing law: WHAT gets served, and HOW it gets served.
Last month, in Only serve what is REQUIRED, I suggested insisted that service costs can go through the roof if plaintiff’s counsel seeks to serve documents that aren’t strictly mandated by local rule.*
Routine practice dictates that, along with the Summons and Complaint, additional documents must be served as well. ECF Rules, civil cover sheet, the particular judge’s individual rules of practice, etc… those ancillary docs that have nothing specifically to do with the case at bar, but which are served as a matter of course, usually to deflect any hint of a 12(b)(4) motion. Unfortunately, those documents can sometimes double or even triple the cost to translate everything going to Germany or Japan or Mexico. Thousands of dollars spent on “well, we’ve always done it that way.”
My response: no. Just… no. If it’s not required, leave it out.
But the flip side is also true:
MAKE SURE YOU SERVE EVERYTHING THAT LOCAL RULES REQUIRE.
“They tell me I have to serve through The Hague.”
I hear that phrase at least three or four times a month, and while I forego the inclination to offer that Hague requests don’t actually get sent to Holland (unless they’re being served there), I do have to clarify a couple of thoughts on the matter very early in every conversation. Above all, if a defendant is to be served in a fellow Hague Service Convention jurisdiction, the service has to comply with the Convention– simple as that. And if anybody tells you otherwise, introduce them to the Honorable Sandra Day O’Connor and Article VI of the U.S. Constitution.
More specifically, tell them to read Volkswagenwerk Aktiengesellschaft v. Schlunk, 486 U.S. 694 (1988). It’s a humdinger. Continue Reading Hague Service means different things in different places.
[Author’s Note: this applies to federal practice!]
Another quirk comes across my desk now and again that seems, on the surface, to be fairly prophylactic. Realizing that the Hague Request I filed in China months ago will take a while longer to come back, my client petitions the court to extend the Rule 4(m) service deadline by another 90 days. This is pretty pro forma stuff, so the judge says sure, that’s okay. Another 90 days go by and the court wants to know just what in the hell is going on here, counsel… why haven’t you gotten this served yet? Didn’t I grant you an extension already? Continue Reading Motion to Extend? Don’t do it.
