A tortfeasor or a judgment debtor, keenly aware that his actions render him liable to another, is stealthily evading service using the standard arsenal of tricks: refusing to open the home door, avoiding speaking to strangers, and otherwise flying under the radar in public. Yet, that same person is posting identifying details such as his relationships, friends, hometown, birthday and job information, commenting on articles, pictures, postings and videos, revealing his ever-changing location (restaurants, shows, etc.), and otherwise having a very active online presence. While it may be difficult or impossible to serve the defendant who is hiding in the “real world,” you’ve got him right where you need him in the “cyber world.” Should service of process be just a click away?
I reasoned in a January 2013 article, “In Defense of Service of Process via Facebook,” why service of process via Facebook would further due process objectives and provide a form of notice to inform parties that a lawsuit has been initiated against them that is more effective than other established “alternative” methods. The article mentioned Australian, Canadian and New Zealand courts as well as a Minnesota state court, which had permitted service of process by social media.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
