Quantcast

Tag Archives: Service of Process

Real Property – Foreclosure Sale – Bona Fide Purchasers – Civil Practice – Service of Process – Sale Price (access required)

Bloody Point Property Owners Association, Inc. v. Ashton (Lawyers Weekly No. 011-098-14, 8 pp.) (James Lockemy, J.) Appealed from Beaufort County (Marvin Dukes III, Master-in-Equity) S.C. App. Holding: The respondent-purchasers had no notice of the Pennsylvania appellants’ claims that they ...

Read More »

No more service on a handshake (access required)

Signature

Until recently, many attorneys and the process servers they depend on have done business based solely on handshakes, making it one of the few aspects of modern life untouched by contracts. That once casual relationship has become increasingly complicated and strained in the wake of a federal Consumer Financial Protection Bureau bulletin that announced new policies and procedures for debt collection.

Read More »

Civil Practice – Service of Process – By Publication – Default Judgment – Motion to Vacate – Forfeiture (access required)

State ex rel. Ariail v. $88,148.45 In this civil forfeiture action, defendant Magruder was served by publication, and a default judgment was entered against her. Even though an assistant solicitor in the civil division apparently did not inquire of her fellow assistant solicitor -- who was handling the criminal cases against Magruder -- as to Magruder’s whereabouts, Magruder has failed to establish that the civil division assistant solicitor made false or fraudulent statements when she said in an affidavit that she had “exhausted all known avenues to locate” Magruder.

Read More »

Civil Practice – Service of Process – Pleadings Amendment – Statute of Limitations (access required)

Mims v. Babcock Center, Inc. Plaintiff filed her original complaint on May 29, 2007 but never served it. She filed an amended complaint on May 7, 2008 and served it on May 12, 2008. Reading S.C. Code Ann. § 15-3-20(B) and Rule 3(a), SCRCP, together, we find the trial court erred when it granted defendants’ motion to dismiss based on insufficiency of process and insufficiency of service of process, as well as lack of jurisdiction, and failure to prosecute.

Read More »