Vision Bank v. The Rookery, LLC et al

Filing 109

ORDER denying 102 Motion to Appoint Process Server. Signed by Chief Judge William H. Steele on 7/22/2013. (tgw)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA SOUTHERN DIVISION SE PROPERTY HOLDINGS, LLC, Plaintiff, v. THE ROOKERY, LLC, et al., Defendants. ) ) ) ) ) CIVIL ACTION 11-0014-WS-C ) ) ) ) ORDER The plaintiff has filed a motion to appoint a special process server. (Doc. 102). The plaintiff apparently seeks to serve “mailings of garnishment” on defendant Richard Long, against whom default judgment was entered upon motion after he was served with process but failed to plead or otherwise defend. (Docs. 6, 33, 42, 48, 49). The plaintiff’s terse motion invokes without explanation Rule 5, which addresses service of papers after the original complaint but which does not address appointment of special process servers for that purpose.1 Accordingly, the plaintiff’s motion is denied, without prejudice to its ability to file a properly supported motion. DONE and ORDERED this 22nd day of July, 2013. s/ WILLIAM H. STEELE CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 1 Rule 4(c)(3) permits appointment of a special process server, but only for service of process, which does not appear to be what the plaintiff desires to serve. And since Rule 4(c)(2) permits service of process by “[a]ny person who is at least 18 years old and not a party,” it is not clear why special appointment would be sought.

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?