Zavala v. Top Shelf Electric Corp.
- Paul Engelmayer
- 1:20-cv-09437
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
In Zavala v. Top Shelf Electric Corp., Judge Engelmayer authorized alternative service on Pablo Ibepaulino by certified mail and email.
The ruling affected the plaintiffs and defendant Pablo Ibepaulino by authorizing the plaintiffs to serve him through certified mail and email.
What happened
In Zavala v. Top Shelf Electric Corp., the plaintiffs objected to a magistrate judge’s denial of their request to serve defendant Pablo Ibepaulino through alternative methods and to extend the service deadline.
The plaintiffs told the court that three attempts to personally serve Ibepaulino at his current address had failed because of an aggressive German shepherd. They proposed sending the complaint by certified mail to that address and by email to an address the plaintiffs determined belonged to Ibepaulino’s wife.
Judge Paul A. Engelmayer granted the plaintiffs leave to use both methods, finding that traditional service was impracticable and that the proposed methods were reasonably likely to notify Ibepaulino. The plaintiffs had 11 days to complete service and file proof with the court.
The detailed version
- Zavala v. Top Shelf Electric Corp. · No. 1:20-cv-09437
- Paul Engelmayer
- June 14, 2021
Background
The plaintiffs filed the complaint on November 12, 2020. The court referred the case to Magistrate Judge Kevin N. Fox for general pretrial supervision. The plaintiffs first received an extension of time to serve several defendants. They later asked to serve those defendants by alternative means and to receive another extension. Judge Fox denied that request on May 20, 2021.
The plaintiffs filed a limited objection to that order concerning service on Pablo Ibepaulino. They said they had made three prior attempts to serve him personally at the address where they determined he currently lived. Those attempts were impeded by an aggressive German shepherd.
Court’s analysis
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(e) allows service on an individual by methods authorized by the law of the state where the federal district court is located. New York law permits a court to direct another method of service when service through the statute’s other methods is impracticable.
The court found that the plaintiffs had made diligent efforts to serve Ibepaulino and had shown that traditional service was impracticable. The plaintiffs proposed serving him by certified mail at the Powdermill address and by email at an address they had reliably determined belonged to his wife.
The court also found that these methods satisfied due process. It reasoned that certified mail sent to Ibepaulino’s residence was substantially likely to reach him and that the additional email would increase the likelihood that he would receive notice. Due process requires a method of service reasonably calculated to notify interested parties about the action and give them an opportunity to respond.
Ruling
Judge Engelmayer granted the plaintiffs leave to serve Ibepaulino through both proposed alternative methods. The court directed the plaintiffs to send him the complaint and the order by certified mail and email within 11 days of the decision and to file proof of service on the court’s electronic docket.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.