Service of Summons Issues Addressed By Federal Court

In the case of Papin v. Taylor, No. 23-2591 (E.D. Pa. July 2, 2024 Surrick, J.), the court granted a Motion to Dismiss based on service of process issues.

In this case, the court noted that the Plaintiff never attempted to serve his twice reinstated Writ of Summons.  As such, the summons was noted to be ineffective to toll the statute of limitations.

The federal district court noted that, under Lamp v. Heyman, a Writ of Summons is effective to commence a cause of action only where the Plaintiff made good faith efforts to serve the Defendant with process. Here, the record confirmed that the Plaintiff initially made no attempt to complete service at all.

Moreover, when the Plaintiff eventually attempted to complete service, he did not follow the rules for serving an out-of-state Defendant.

In this decision, the court also reaffirmed the well-settled rule that communications with an insurance carrier Defendant do not provide a valid alternative to the completion of service.

The court also noted that settlement negotiations do not create a basis for an equitable estoppel argument against a lack of proper service argument. 

In this case, the court additionally ruled that counsel’s alleged lack of knowledge relative to the service of process issues also did not support a claim of equitable estoppel.

Anyone wishing to review a copy of this decision may click this LINK.  The Court's companion Order can be viewed HERE.


I send thanks to Attorney James M. Beck of the Philadelphia office of the Reed Smith law firm for bringing this case to my attention.