Rimas Eugenio v. Eugenio
- Haywood Gilliam
- 4:23-cv-02832
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 2
In Sheryl May Rimas Eugenio v. Johnny Benson Eugenio, Judge Illman appointed Nationwide Legal to serve execution writs while the U.S. Marshal remained levying officer.
Sheryl May Rimas Eugenio, Nationwide Legal, LLC, and the United States Marshal were affected by the order; Johnny Benson Eugenio was the opposing party in the action.
What happened
Sheryl May Rimas Eugenio asked the court to appoint Nationwide Legal, LLC, a registered California process server, to serve any writs of execution in the case.
The court explained that federal rules allow a person specially appointed by the court to serve process other than a summons or subpoena, and that California law allows registered process servers to levy under a writ of execution.
Judge Robert M. Illman granted the request, appointed Nationwide Legal to serve any writs of execution, and ordered that the United States Marshal remain the levying officer.
The detailed version
- Rimas Eugenio v. Eugenio · No. 4:23-cv-02832
- Haywood Gilliam
- Aug. 19, 2025
Background
Sheryl May Rimas Eugenio requested that Nationwide Legal, LLC, a registered California process server, be specially appointed to serve any writs of execution in the action.
Court's reasoning
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4.1 provides that process other than a summons or subpoena must be served by a United States marshal, deputy marshal, or a person specially appointed for that purpose. Rule 69 provides that a money judgment is enforced by a writ of execution unless the court directs otherwise, and that execution procedures generally follow the law of the state where the federal court is located. The court noted that California law permits a registered process server to levy under a writ of execution and that registered process servers may be appointed under Rule 4.1 for this purpose.
Ruling
Judge Robert M. Illman granted the plaintiff's request. Nationwide Legal, LLC, was authorized and appointed to serve any writs of execution in the action. The United States Marshal remained the levying officer.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.