The recent passing of Professor David D. Siegel of Albany Law School brings to mind his frequent and insightful musings on what he called the “problems and pitfalls” of New York’s Civil Practice Law and Rules (CPLR). In the fourth edition of his treatise on New York Practice he briefly discusses the decision of the court in Hollow v. Hollow, 193 Misc.2d 691 (Sup. Ct., Oswego Co. 2002) where service by telex was permitted “in a hostile foreign nation.” Siegel concluded that the “airspace [functioned] as the process server.” Siegel, New York Practice §75 (Fourth Ed. 2005). Suffice it to say, current thinking has expanded on utilizing “airspace” in other formats as a method of service and as part and parcel of the ongoing evolution of the practice of divorce and family law in the era of the Internet.
In the recent decision of Matter of Noel v. Maria, F-00787-13/14B (Family Court, Richmond Co., Sept. 12, 2014), a Support Magistrate authorized the petitioner in a support proceeding to serve the respondent with the summons and petition via Facebook, perhaps signaling the dawn of a new era in the often frustrating realm of serving process on evasive defendants in matrimonial and other family law proceedings.
