In a dispute focused on what constitutes effective notice of a lawsuit, a Pennsylvania state court has ruled that a car-accident plaintiff’s lawyer’s communication with and attempts to serve defendant’s counsel directly, rather than follow procedural rules directing service through the Sheriff’s Office, “were not meant to stall the judicial machinery” and were sufficient, despite delays compounded by the pandemic.

Addressing defendant’s preliminary objection that she and her counsel were not timely served, Judge David Williamson of the Monroe County Court of Common Pleas wrote that “plaintiff counsel tried to discuss and arrange acceptance of service with defendant counsel who was already involved in the case,” and that “defendant counsel was aware of the claims made, knew a complaint had been filed, and that plaintiff was trying to ascertain if service would be accepted.”

This content has been archived.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

Why am I seeing this?

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]