Husbands ex sent a summons by certified mail from Arizona. The package indicated it was photos. The package return sender used a minors name as the sender.. The package was accepted by someone other than my husband. Was he properly served?
2007-11-20 05:40:46 · 4 answers · asked by Herrera 1 in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
You'll have to consult an attorney in your state and in Arizona to know for sure.
It doesn't matter that it was marked "pictures" or that the sendee was listed as a child. It was sent registered mail with return receipt which is a valid way of serving a summons in all 50 states.
The problem is who it was accepted by. If it was accepted by his place of employment, a security guard at an apartment complex, or anyone who either has authority to act within the household, chances are it is served legally. This is especially true if it is followed up with a phone call to his answering machine or to your husband in person. (more states require this if the summons is left with a security guard or someone in a similar position)
Of course, what happens next? You can challenge the summons. If you challenge the summons prior to the court date, that could be an admission that you recieved it. If you challenge it after the fact, you will have a judgement against you and will be actually challenging the judgement on the basis that you were improperly served.
You can call the circuit court and ask them directly, you can call a lawyer, or you can call someone who is authorized to serve warrants (they generally know all the in's and out's of the law pertaining to summons).
FYI, I had an attorney served a summons where he had instructed people around him to not accept it. The summons was actually thrown at a security guard in the apartment complex he lived at. The security firm then wrote a letter (no doubt dictated by the attorney) to the court to say he was improperly served. I was able to show the judge that it was properly served according to California law and that the letter from the security firm was proof it was properly served. It was an extremely easy judgement.
2007-11-20 06:12:32 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
It doesn't matter much - if you were not properly served it only means that you might have the proceedings delayed by another 60 days and when you finally show up 1) you will have angered everyone and lost credibility by trying to get off on a technicality 2) the judge can still backdate payments back to the time the original motion was filed - so you'll just have piled on debt.
2007-11-20 09:01:56 · answer #2 · answered by chimpsky_clone 2 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Why does it matter? Is he going to shirk his obligation based on a technicality? If so he is a real winner. Just deal with it instead of playing games.
He can either decide he was not and fail to show up. His ex will then get a default judgment and then he can then fight based on improper service (see why this is a BAD idea?). Of he can appear and claim he was improperly served. The judge will probably say "well, you are here. Is there any reason we can not proceed?".
2007-11-20 05:52:44 · answer #3 · answered by davidmi711 7 · 3⤊ 1⤋
If he signed that he received it, yes he was properly served. If someone else signed, then no he was not.
Either way, if he knows of the hearing he should do the right thing and attend.
2007-11-20 09:30:34 · answer #4 · answered by janine o 4 · 1⤊ 1⤋