{"id":2188,"date":"2018-04-07T09:03:36","date_gmt":"2018-04-07T17:03:36","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/trainingpips.com\/?page_id=2188"},"modified":"2019-04-18T03:14:58","modified_gmt":"2019-04-18T11:14:58","slug":"ps-102-chapter-2-article-2-abode-service-upheld-chase-v-starkweather","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/www.trainingpips.com\/index.php\/ps-102-a-course-outline\/ps-102-understanding-case-summaries\/ps-102-chapter-2-an-introduction-to-abode-service\/ps-102-chapter-2-article-2-abode-service-upheld-chase-v-starkweather\/","title":{"rendered":"PS 102 – Chapter 2 – Article 2 – Abode Service Upheld – Chase v. Starkweather"},"content":{"rendered":"

Summary <\/span><\/strong>
\nChase v. Starkweather, No. 33105-5-11 (March 11, 2005 Unpublished Opinion).<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

Facts<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

The Chases sued Starkweather for faulty roofing work. A process server delivered a copy of the summons and complaint<\/a> to Starkweather’s father at the father’s home in Moses Lake. According to the process server’s declaration<\/a>, she was told by a neighbor who knew Starkweather and his father that Starkweather was currently living with his father at the Moses Lake address.<\/span><\/p>\n

Starkweather did not appear and the Plaintiffs sought and obtained a default<\/a> order and judgment<\/a>. Starkweather filed a motion<\/a> to vacate the default judgment<\/a> due to improper service. He submitted affidavits from him and his father stating:<\/span><\/p>\n

    \n
  1. That his residence was in Yakima.<\/span><\/li>\n
  2. That he had never lived at the Moses Lake address.<\/span><\/li>\n
  3. That he had never used the Moses Lake address as his own.<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

    Starkweather submitted additional evidence<\/a> that:<\/span><\/p>\n

      \n
    1. He had received service of process in an unrelated lawsuit<\/a> at the Yakima address.<\/span><\/li>\n
    2. He had received a DUI<\/a> citation<\/a> which listed the Yakima address.<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

      Starkweather also argued that the process servers proof of serivce was not factially correct because part of it claimed that personal service<\/a> was had when in fact<\/a> the service was done by the abode method of service.<\/span><\/p>\n

      In response, Plaintiffs submitted the process server’s declaration<\/a> and the report of an investigator hired to locate Starkweather. The investigator stated that Starkweather gave his Moses Lake address to police when he was arrested and charged with a domestic violence offense.<\/span><\/p>\n

      Judicial<\/a> History<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

      Superior Court denied Defendant<\/a>’s motion<\/a> to vacate the judgment<\/a> due to improper service. Appellate Court affirms.<\/span><\/p>\n

      Specific Issues<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

        \n
      1. Is an affidavit<\/a> of service “facially correct” if it describes the time, place and manner of service? Yes.<\/strong><\/span><\/li>\n
      2. Must a party<\/a> challenging service present “clear and convincing evidence<\/a>” that service was improper? Yes.<\/strong><\/span><\/li>\n
      3. Can a person<\/a> have more than one “usual place of abode?” Yes.<\/strong><\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

        Holding<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

          \n
        1. An affidavit<\/a> of service is facially correct if it describes service in compliance with RCW 4.28.080 (16) and CR 4 (g) (7) (time, place and manner of service).<\/span><\/li>\n
        2. An affidavit<\/a> of service that is facially correct is presumed valid and, after judgment<\/a> is entered, a party<\/a> challenging service must present clear and convincing evidence<\/a> that service was improper.<\/span><\/li>\n
        3. The defendant<\/a> did not prove the Moses Lake address was not a usual place of abode.<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

          Reasoning<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

          While part of the process server’s proof of service said service had been done by personal service<\/a>, a later part of it described the service as having been done using abode service. The court found that the process server’s affidavit<\/a> satisfied the requirements of CR 4(g)(7). The affidavit<\/a> was facially correct and the burden shifted to Defendant<\/a> to present clear and convincing evidence<\/a> that the Moses Lake address was not his house of usual abode at the time of service.<\/span><\/p>\n

          Plaintiff established that where Defendant<\/a>’s liberty<\/a> interests were at stake he used the Moses Lake address, e.g., when he instructed the government to contact him there; the same location would therefore be the most likely place where he would receive notice<\/a> of a civil<\/a> suit.<\/span><\/p>\n

          Starkweather submitted no evidence<\/a> of his actual abode at the time of service. Moreover, a neighbor told the process server that he was living with his father at the Moses Lake address. Defendant<\/a> did not sustain his burden to present clear and convincing evidence<\/a> that service was improper.<\/span><\/p>\n

          C4PSE Comment<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

          This is an excellent example of why it is important for process servers to take good, concise notes. These notes allow a server to provide their client with a declaration<\/a> or affidavit<\/a> that is facially correct and puts the burden of proof back onto the servee to show that the declaration<\/a>\/affidavit<\/a> is incorrect. Without these concise notes a service could be put at risk of being thrown out by the court.<\/span><\/p>\n

          Also of note is the possibility a person<\/a> has more than one usual place of abode. In this case<\/a> it appears the defendant<\/a> was maintaining two places of abode, one in Moses Lake and the other in Yakima.<\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

          Summary Chase v. Starkweather, No. 33105-5-11 (March 11, 2005 Unpublished Opinion). Facts The Chases sued Starkweather for faulty roofing work. A process server delivered a copy of the summons and complaint<\/a> to Starkweather’s father at the father’s home in Moses Lake. According to the process server’s declaration<\/a>, she was told by a neighbor who knew […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"parent":2178,"menu_order":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","template":"","meta":{"footnotes":""},"class_list":["post-2188","page","type-page","status-publish","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.trainingpips.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/2188","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.trainingpips.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.trainingpips.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/page"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.trainingpips.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.trainingpips.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=2188"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.trainingpips.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/2188\/revisions"}],"up":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.trainingpips.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/2178"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.trainingpips.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2188"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}