Free Newsletter
Civil Practice — Service of Process – Appropriate Addressee – Actual Notice
By: Teresa Bruno, Opinions Editor//November 25, 2014
Civil Practice — Service of Process – Appropriate Addressee – Actual Notice
By: Teresa Bruno, Opinions Editor//November 25, 2014
Woodruff v. Pride Mobility Products Corp. (Lawyers Weekly No. 002-228-14, 4 pp.) (Mary Lewis, J.) 3:14-cv-02573; D.S.C.
Holding: Even though plaintiff mailed service papers addressed to “whom it may concern” via certified mail and did not restrict delivery to an appropriate addressee as required by Rule 4(d)(8), SCRCP, South Carolina courts have not required stringent compliance with Rule 4(d)(8). Where defense counsel acknowledged receipt of plaintiff’s claim and indicated that the matter had been referred to defendant’s insurance carrier, the court finds that plaintiff sufficiently complied with the rule and that defendant received actual notice of the suit and has not been prejudiced by any technical defect in service.
Defendant’s motion to dismiss is denied.
Business Law
- Economy forces attorneys to get down to business
- Business Court judges trawl for customers
- Va. company's Web site did not subject business to personal jurisdiction in S.C., appeals panel rules
- Former running back from S.C. wins courtroom victory in contract dispute
- Contract – Government Contract – Qui Tam – False Claims Act
- Licenses & Permits – Beer & Wine Permit – Restrictive Covenant – Suitable Location
- Consumer Protection – FCRA – Auto Loan – Bank Accounting Errors
- Licenses & Permits – Veterinarian – Vaccine Maintenance
- Tort – Business Tort – Va. Computer Crimes Act – Trade Secrets
- Textile firm, railroad settle Graniteville train wreck lawsuit
- State regulators look at car dealer accused of lying to customers
- Subprime mortgage meltdown hits securities law
Commentary
- Virginia Tech student got due process in hearing
- High court justices cross the line of propriety
- High court’s term was rough on big business
- The flip side of generative AI in law and how to address it
- The fight for equal educational opportunity continues
- Letter From The Editor – Working from Home
- NLRB joins FTC in taking aim at non-competes
- Supreme Court leaves key internet protection untouched
- US Supreme Court bites back at parody’s use of the First Amendment
- My goal: Provide the information that you need now
- Case study: North Carolina courts provide guidance on scope, limitations of attorney-client privilege
- A Different Ode to Pro Bono Work
Polls
Loading ...
SC Lawyers Weekly keeps you connected with the latest legal news, Daily Practice and Breaking
News alerts.
Sign-up for SC Lawyers Weekly Email Alerts
