Mathis v. BellSouth Telecomms. Inc.

The trial court should have treated the plaintiff's response to the defendant's first motion to dismiss as a motion to correct a misnomer, since the defendant was the properly-served correct defendant, which had its name incorrectly denominated in the pleadings.

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.

Carolyn C. Mathis, d/b/a Private Secretary Professional Services, appeals pro se from the trial court’s order finding that she had failed to effect service of the complaint she filed against BellSouth Telecommunications, Inc., d/b/a AT&T Georgia “BellSouth” and dismissing the same with prejudice. Because the record shows that Mathis did properly serve BellSouth with the summons and complaint, we reverse. “A trial court’s finding of insufficient service of process will be upheld on appeal absent a showing of an abuse of discretion.” Aikens v. Brent Scarbrough & Co. 1 Such an abuse occurs where the trial court’s ruling is unsupported by any evidence of record or where that ruling misstates or misapplies the relevant law. See Glisson v. Global Security Services .2

Mathis initiated this litigation seeking to recover payments she made to BellSouth over a number of years, on the grounds that the company had failed to provide the telecommunication services for which Mathis had paid. On April 16, 2008, Mathis filed suit in the Magistrate Court of Fulton County, naming “AT&T Telecommunications” as the defendant. Mathis served “AT&T Telecommunications” on April 30, 2008 at CT Corporations System, 1201 Peachtree Street, Atlanta, Georgia. CT Corporations System returned the service papers to Mathis, copying the Fulton County Magistrate Court, stating that “AT&T Telecommunications is not listed on our records or on the records of the State of Georgia.” On June 26, 2008, the Fulton County Magistrate’s Court ordered the case transferred to the Gwinnett County Magistrate’s Court, based upon Mathis’s status as a Gwinnett County resident. Because Mathis’s claim exceeded its jurisdictional limits, however, the Gwinnett County Magistrate Court transferred the case to the Gwinnett County State Court on July 10, 2008.

Mathis v. BellSouth Telecomms. Inc.

The trial court should have treated the plaintiff's response to the defendant's first motion to dismiss as a motion to correct a misnomer, since the defendant was the properly-served correct defendant, which had its name incorrectly denominated in the pleadings.

Share with Email

Thank you for sharing!

Trending Stories

More From ALM

Subscribe to Daily Report