SingleCare Services, LLC v. Johnson
- Paul Engelmayer
- 1:20-cv-06488
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 4
In SingleCare Services v. Johnson, Judge Engelmayer granted alternative service by email and mail after traditional service proved impracticable.
SingleCare Services, LLC received permission to serve Terrence Johnson by email and U.S. Mail; the order did not decide the underlying claims.
What happened
SingleCare Services, LLC sued Terrence Johnson over alleged unauthorized use of its intellectual property and trademarks, as well as alleged contract and indemnification violations. SingleCare asked to serve Johnson by email and U.S. Mail after unsuccessful attempts at his last known address.
The court found that traditional service was impracticable because three attempts to serve Johnson at the Bronx address failed, and a public-records search found no alternative address. It also found that email and mail were reasonably likely to notify Johnson about the case.
Judge Paul A. Engelmayer granted SingleCare leave to use the proposed alternative service. The court directed SingleCare to send the summons, complaint, and order to Johnson by email and U.S. Mail and file proof of service.
The detailed version
- SingleCare Services, LLC v. Johnson · No. 1:20-cv-06488
- Paul Engelmayer
- Sept. 18, 2020
Background
SingleCare Services, LLC, described as a prescription discount provider, sued Terrence Johnson. The complaint asserted claims under the Lanham Act, for breach of contract, and for indemnification. SingleCare alleged that Johnson, a former independent contractor, used SingleCare's intellectual property and registered trademarks without authorization.
On September 11, 2020, SingleCare moved for permission to serve Johnson by alternative means. It proposed using email and U.S. Mail.
Impracticability of Traditional Service
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(e) allows service under the law of the state where the federal court is located. New York law permits a court to direct another method of service when service through the law's specified methods is impracticable.
The court found that SingleCare had shown impracticability. SingleCare had tried to serve Johnson at 2141 Prospect Avenue, Apt. 9, Bronx County, New York 10457, an address Johnson had provided in October 2018 and May 2019. Johnson also used that address on a tax form dated October 31, 2019, and had SingleCare send commission checks there, including the most recent check sent in July 2020. A person at the address refused to open the door and said Johnson did not live there. SingleCare then made two additional unsuccessful attempts at the same address and unsuccessfully tried to contact neighbors. A public-records search did not identify another possible address.
Due Process
The court explained that due process requires a service method reasonably calculated to notify interested parties about the case and give them an opportunity to respond. SingleCare identified the email address Johnson had provided in his independent-contractor agreement and used during his relationship with SingleCare: tjohnson914@gmail.com. The court found it substantially reasonable to assume that emails sent there would likely reach Johnson.
The court also found that mail to the Bronx address supported due process. If Johnson remained associated with that address, the mail could reach him there. If he had moved, the court reasoned, the mail might be forwarded to his new address.
Ruling
Judge Paul A. Engelmayer granted the plaintiff leave to use the proposed alternative means of service. The court directed SingleCare to serve Johnson with the summons, complaint, and order by email and U.S. Mail, and to file proof of service on the court's electronic filing system. The order addressed service only; the opinion does not decide the merits of SingleCare's underlying claims.
Read the full 4-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.