Skip to main content

Will a proof of service by mail be considered void if the person sends back the package?

San Jose, CA |

If papers are served by mail by USPS Priority Mail with Tracking service and the recipient in their own handwriting writes "Return to Sender" will the court still consider the papers as served with due process or do I have to serve the papers again?

Attorney Answers 3

Posted

It will not be considered served and they are clearly avoiding service. You need to hire a process server to personally serve them. If they continue to evade service, you may be able to use that letter, in their handwriting, along with other evidence of evading service, to ask for sanctions. If the item you are servicing is a summons and/or complaint, those need to be personally served anyway so there would be no real harm.

Mark as helpful

2 lawyers agree

1 comment

Asker

Posted

Thank you, it was a CSC statement, but i have to serve copies of my filed I&E before an SOC next month. If have it served at their work and they don't want to come out and the secretary accepts it and their name is written on the POS will that work?

Posted

The answer will depend upon what "papers" you are trying to have served. For example, a summons cannot be served by mail. A subpoena cannot be served by mail.

Frank W. Chen has been licensed to practice law in California since 1988. The information presented here is general in nature and is not intended, nor should be construed, as legal advice for a particular case. This Avvo.com posting does not create any attorney-client relationship with the author. For specific advice about your particular situation, please consult with your own attorney.

Mark as helpful

7 lawyers agree

Posted

I agree with Mr. Chen. It depends on what you are trying to serve. If the party has appeared in the action and the package was addressed to that party at their service address -- they were served so long as you were not a party signing the proof of service. However, such "service" would be improper for a summons or subpoena.

I am licensed in California only and my answers on Avvo assume California law. Answers provided by me are for general information only. They are not legal advice or counsel. Answers must not be relied upon. Legal advice and counsel must be based on the interplay between specific exact facts and the law. This forum does not allow for the discussion of that interplay. My answer to any specific question would likely be different if that interplay were explored during an attorney-client relationship. I provide legal advice and counsel during the course of an attorney-client relationship only. The exchange of information through this forum does not establish such a relationship. That relationship is established only by personal and direct consultation with me followed by the execution of a written attorney-client agreement signed by each of us. The communications on this website are not privileged or confidential and I assume no duty to anyone by my participation on Avvo or because I have answered or commented on a question. All legal proceedings involve deadlines and time limiting statutes. So that legal rights are not lost for failure to timely take appropriate action and because I do not provide legal advice or counsel in answer to any question, if you are an interested party you should promptly and personally consult with an attorney for advice and counsel. Also, see Avvo's terms and conditions of use, specifically item 9, incorporated by this reference

Mark as helpful

5 lawyers agree

1 comment

Asker

Posted

It was a copy of the filed CSC Statement