An axiom of life was posed to me one day toward the end of my 2L year:
Lawyers are the most helpless race of people on the planet.
Modify State Court Summons Deadlines. Just do it.
[Update, August 2025: Michigan is a special situation, outlined here.]
A while back, I wrote that removing the self-expiration language in a standard bankruptcy summons is imperative when serving overseas defendants in adversary proceedings. I’ve used that post on several occasions to advise litigators in various state venues to do likewise, where the documents contain text like “This summons is effective for service only if served within 30 days after the date it is issued.”
The same basic logic applies:
If the summons expires by its own terms before we can reasonably expect a foreign authority to get the thing served, we’re wasting everybody’s time– especially the clerk’s office.
Continue Reading Modify State Court Summons Deadlines. Just do it.
Judge Albright gets the Hague “alternative” question right, and so do others.
[Update: April 22, 2022: Aaaaand then he takes the opposite view, getting it wrong. See my new rant way down at the bottom.] Continue Reading Judge Albright gets the Hague “alternative” question right, and so do others.
Remove the second page of your summons (federal).
(TL;DR– it isn’t used after service abroad, so why pay to translate it?) Continue Reading Remove the second page of your summons (federal).
Reshuffle pending at Shell? Not a big deal for service.
Reports the New York Times this morning:
Shell proposes a shift to Britain, dropping ‘Royal Dutch’ from its name.
The Anglo-Dutch energy conglomerate will apparently become just Anglo in the coming months, which begs the question… how do we serve the company when it’s sued in a North American court? Continue Reading Reshuffle pending at Shell? Not a big deal for service.
Deadline extensions under Rule 4(m)
At least once a week, a client will ask how much time they should put in their request for an extension under Rule 4(m) when serving an overseas defendant. My answer, as I’ve said before: DON’T. Continue Reading Deadline extensions under Rule 4(m)
“Certified” translations… not a real thing. At least, not a real *legal* thing.
Another Frequently Asked Question on board this little Faering that is my law firm:
“Does my translation have to be certified?”
By frequently, I mean at least once a week for several years. Most recently, it came in the form of a comment on my old post, Yes, counsel, you do have to translate that thing, but it’s often a question in the mind of the lawyers and their staffs who call or email me. Their Googling has led them to believe it’s a looming issue, and if they don’t have the proper certification, their Hague Service Convention request is doomed.
The short answer: no. But with a trio of caveats. Continue Reading “Certified” translations… not a real thing. At least, not a real *legal* thing.
CPAP suits and Koninklijke Philips, N.V.
[Update 2025: Most CPAP suits nowadays are in MDL status and thus subject to mandatory acceptance by defense counsel. Still, this serves as a primer, and it’s still specifically applicable to state court actions.]
A real world illustration has become fairly frequent of late… but it needs a bit of personal background.
Service abroad: the questions we ask.
A huge chunk of my practice arises from inquiries lawyers send through this blog– and it stands to reason. Look over to the right and you’ll see our contact information (scroll all the way to the bottom if you’re on a phone or tablet). In a perfect world, we’ll get a chance to talk on the phone, bat around ideas, and collectively grumble about the utter silliness that is the Langdellian method. Inevitably, we ask the following questions, whether by phone or email, because “hey, Aaron, what do you charge to serve a defendant overseas?” just doesn’t give me enough to go on.
Rather than give the trite lawyer answer “it depends,” I ask pretty much the same questions every time. The answers vary, of course, and often lead to more questions and ultimately, the various conclusions that I can offer as recommended next steps.
Registered agents? Nope. Not overseas.
An interesting quandary pops up fairly regularly, and I find myself explaining the issue so frequently that it warrants a post. [TL;DR… in the U.S., corporations and other entities created pursuant to statute have registered agents. Elsewhere– and I mean just about everywhere else– the same types of entities only have registered addresses. You don’t have to worry about whether you’ve designated the right individual officer because there isn’t one.]