<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN"
"http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd">
<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
<title></title>
</head>
<body style="font-family:Arial;font-size:14px">
<p>Law Office of<br>
<strong>F.ANDREKITA SILVA</strong><br>
<strong>_______________________________________________________ </strong><br>
<br>
June 8, 2022 <br>
<br>
Listserve,<br>
<br>
In a case with 2 defendants, one defendant was timely served. Despite many efforts, it was not possible to serve Defendant 2.<br>
<br>
Defendant 2 appeared and moved for a summary judgment order for dismissal of the action against them for failure of service of process. (Plaintiff believed D2 had been properly served. But, the court found the service was not valid. D2’s motion for SM was granted. Action against D2 dismissed for <em><strong>lack of jurisdiction</strong></em> <strong><em>without prejudice</em></strong> .<br>
<br>
After D2's dismissal, Plaintiff made 8 more unsuccessful service attempts. Plaintiff then moved for order to give permission to serve D2 by publication or U.S. mail ( 29 attempts had been made.) . Plaintiff argued that address was known and valid but D2 was evading service . Plaintiff relied on RCW 4.28.100(2) : Service by Publication, CR4(d)(4), and CR5(5) and (6). The action against Defendant 1 is still alive and pending.<br>
<br>
D2 asked for denial of relief and argued that<br>
<br>
1) a new action against D2 had not been filed,<br>
2) there was no legal authority for the relief sought, and<br>
3) there was a defect in the service of the motion on D2. <br>
<br>
D2 did not cite any caselaw or statute for their position. (There was actually a defect in the service of the motion on D2, but not on D1. D1 was the only active Defendant left in the action.)<br>
<br>
The court denied relief on the basis that there was no legal basis for the motion. <br>
<br>
<br>
QUESTION: <br>
<br>
Is there a civil rule or statute that requires that a new complaint be filed ? (again, action still alive and pending against D1)<br>
<br>
Is there a civil rule or statute that describes the steps that must be taken if Plaintiff wants to continue trying to serve D2?<br>
<br>
Other than filing a motion asking for permission to serve D2 by publication or mail, is there a statute or civil rule that describes what, if anything, must be done before filing that motion ? In our case, <em><strong>29 attempts were made</strong></em>, all evidence from process server was placed before the court, and on the last attempt, D2 placed a lock on the gate so that server could not approach the house.<br>
<br>
Is there a civil rule or statute that says that D2 must receive notice of Plaintiff’s motion? (D2 has already been dismissed from the action without prejudice.)<br>
<br>
I am really unclear on why the court denied the motion on the grounds that there was no legal authority for the motion.<br>
<br>
<br>
andrekita<br>
Law Office of F. Andrekita Silva<br>
1325 Fourth Avenue, Suite 2000<br>
Seattle, Washington 98101<br>
206-224-8288<br>
www.seattle-silvalaw.com<br>
<br>
</p>
<p><br></p>
</body>
</html>