{"id":2247,"date":"2018-04-07T19:14:52","date_gmt":"2018-04-08T03:14:52","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/trainingpips.com\/?page_id=2247"},"modified":"2019-04-18T03:17:12","modified_gmt":"2019-04-18T11:17:12","slug":"ps-102-chapter-6-article-2-evasion-of-service-weiss-vs-glemp","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/www.trainingpips.com\/index.php\/ps-102-a-course-outline\/ps-102-understanding-case-summaries\/ps-102-chapter-6-an-introduction-to-evasion-of-service-case-law\/ps-102-chapter-6-article-2-evasion-of-service-weiss-vs-glemp\/","title":{"rendered":"PS 102 – Chapter 6 – Article 2 – Evasion of Service – Weiss vs Glemp"},"content":{"rendered":"

Weiss v. Glemp<\/strong><\/span>
\n727, 127 Wn.2d 726 (1995)<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

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

Rabbi Weiss is a resident of New York. Jozef Cardinal Glemp is resident of Poland. Glemp made a 3 day trip to Seattle, during which time Weiss filed a defamation<\/a> action<\/a> against Glemp in King County<\/a> Superior Court.<\/span><\/p>\n

A process server went to where Glemp was staying to serve the summons and complaint<\/a>. The process server knocked on the door and told the woman who answered that they were looking for Glemp. The woman returned with a priest who said Glemp was having breakfast and to return later. The process server responded that he had ‘important legal<\/a> documents’. The priest left and returned with a second priest who identified himself as Glemp’s secretary. The process server told the secretary that they had important legal<\/a> documents for Glemp and would like to see him. The secretary said Glemp was not available, was not a citizen, and was not subject to the country’s laws. The process server responded that was irrelevant and that he just wanted to deliver the documents to Glemp. The secretary asked the process server to leave, and he left.<\/span><\/p>\n

The process server waited outside the building, hoping to serve Glemp when he left. He could see Glemp through a large window. After about two hours the process server approached the window, and holding the documents up high, yelled Glemp’s name, that he had official documents and that he had been served. As he yelled, Glemp looked over his shoulder at the process server. The process server then placed the documents on the windowsill about 4 feet from where Glemp was sitting.<\/span><\/p>\n

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

Defamation<\/a> action<\/a> filed by Plaintiff Weiss in Superior Court, King County<\/a>, Washington. Defendant<\/a> Glemp filed no answer<\/a> to the complaint<\/a> and later moved for dismissal<\/a> on the grounds that: 1) service of process was insufficient and, 2) that assertion of personal jurisdiction<\/a> over him would violate due process.<\/span><\/p>\n

Trial court granted the motion<\/a> to dismiss on the issue of personal jurisdiction<\/a>. The Supreme Court affirmed the dismissal<\/a>, although on different grounds (insufficient service of process). Because the court concluded that service of process was insufficient, they did not reach the jurisdictional issue.<\/span><\/p>\n

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

    \n
  1. Does service by leaving the summons and complaint<\/a> on a windowsill in view of the Defendant<\/a> substantially comply with the service statute? No<\/strong><\/span><\/li>\n
  2. Does Glemp’s failure to come to the door constitute evasion of service? No<\/strong><\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

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

    Leaving the summons and complaint<\/a> on a windowsill does not comply with the service statute, which provides for delivery to the defendant<\/a> personally or by leaving a copy at the defendant<\/a>’s usual place of abode with some person<\/a> of suitable age and discretion where Defendant<\/a> was staying (then resident therein).<\/span><\/p>\n

    Failing to come to the door does not constitute evasion of service. Those who are to be served with process are under no obligation to arrange a time and place for service or otherwise accommodate the process server.<\/span><\/p>\n

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

    The process server did not leave the summons with anyone. It was left on an outside windowsill and not left with either Defendant<\/a> or a person<\/a> of suitable age and discretion. Under certain circumstances, a defendant<\/a> may<\/a> authorize delivery in a manner not enumerated in the statute, such as agreeing to leave papers in the door. See Thayer v. Edmonds<\/span><\/p>\n

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

    This ruling raises a number of questions for process servers. The most important is the following situation.<\/span><\/p>\n

    A process server approaches the door to a residence. There is both a screen door and a regular door. The process server knocks and the target opens the regular door but not the screen door. The screen door therefore becomes the threshold.<\/span><\/p>\n

    If the process server opens the screen door at this point he is entering the residence unlawfully. If the target does not open the screen door, and the server presents and drops the papers with the screen door closed, it is reasonable<\/a> to believe a court could rule the service invalid based on Glemp.<\/span><\/p>\n

    The court appears to be saying that any barrier between the server and the servee, which would prevent the physical delivery of the documents to the servee, therefore prevents service of occurring.<\/span><\/p>\n

    A window or a screen door would prevent service whereas a barrier, such as a door with bars which would allow the physical passage of the documents, would not prevent service.<\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

    Weiss v. Glemp 727, 127 Wn.2d 726 (1995) Facts Rabbi Weiss is a resident of New York. Jozef Cardinal Glemp is resident of Poland. Glemp made a 3 day trip to Seattle, during which time Weiss filed a defamation<\/a> action<\/a> against Glemp in King County<\/a> Superior Court. A process server went to where Glemp was […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"parent":2243,"menu_order":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","template":"","meta":{"footnotes":""},"class_list":["post-2247","page","type-page","status-publish","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.trainingpips.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/2247","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=2247"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.trainingpips.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/2247\/revisions"}],"up":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.trainingpips.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/2243"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.trainingpips.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2247"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}