Lisa Williams, Jennifer Johnson, Angela Bailey, Dena McDaniel, Kim Brenden-Price, Gail Cannon and Marcy Dodd the “appellants” filed an action against Resurgens and Affiliated Orthopaedists “RAO”, XYZ, Inc., ABC, Inc., John Doe and Richard Roe on October 9, 2002. The complaint alleged that the appellants suffered personal injuries on October 13 and 16, 2000 on the premises of a medical clinic. On October 10, 2002, a Fulton County deputy marshal attempted to perfect service on RAO by visiting the office of its registered agent, Steven Wertheim. Wertheim was not in the office, and the deputy marshal left a copy of the summons and complaint with an individual named Trish Moore. There is no dispute that RAO’s registered agent was never personally served with a copy of the summons and complaint. RAO raised the defense of insufficient service in its answer and subsequently filed a motion to dismiss for insufficient service of process. The trial court granted RAO’s motion to dismiss without hearing oral argument. The appellants allege the trial court erred in granting RAO’s motion to dismiss and erred in failing to rule on their motion to amend the complaint. We find no error and affirm the trial court’s dismissal.
1. The appellants contend the trial court erred in dismissing RAO from the case because service on Moore was proper. Absent an abuse of discretion, a trial court’s finding of insufficient service of process must be affirmed.1 Moreover, in cases in which the statute of limitation has expired and the defendant has made an appearance in court raising an insufficiency of service defense, this Court must apply the standard of “greatest possible diligence” in assessing the plaintiff’s attempts at service.2
