Shapiro v. Jacobson
- Lorna Schofield
- 1:23-cv-03964
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
In Shapiro v. Jacobson, Judge Schofield granted alternative service by email and social media and denied a dismissal motion without prejudice pending a conference.
The ruling directly affected the plaintiffs and Defendant Komorek: the plaintiffs received permission to serve Komorek by email and social media, while Komorek’s motion to dismiss was denied without prejudice pending a conference.
What happened
In Shapiro v. Jacobson, the plaintiffs asked to serve Defendant Komorek through email, social media, and other methods after traditional service attempts were unsuccessful. Komorek had notice of the case and had filed motions through his attorney but had not provided an address for service.
The court found that traditional service was impracticable. It also found that Komorek’s public personal email address and active Instagram and Facebook accounts were reasonably likely to notify him about the case and give him an opportunity to respond. The court therefore found that email and social-media service were sufficient without the other proposed methods.
Judge Schofield granted the plaintiffs’ motion for alternative service and ordered service by email, Instagram, and Facebook. She denied Komorek’s motion to dismiss for lack of prosecution without prejudice, pending an October 11, 2023, conference, and ordered the plaintiffs to file proof of service by October 10.
The detailed version
- Shapiro v. Jacobson · No. 1:23-cv-03964
- Lorna Schofield
- Oct. 4, 2023
Background
The plaintiffs moved for permission to use alternative methods to serve Defendant Komorek. They proposed service through his business and personal email accounts, his attorney, social-media accounts, and personal telephone number. The plaintiffs stated that they had been unable to serve him through traditional methods.
Komorek separately moved to dismiss for lack of prosecution. The opinion states that an earlier motion to dismiss on the same ground had been denied without prejudice while the parties awaited a conference scheduled for October 11, 2023, at 4:10 p.m.
Alternative Service
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(e) permits service on an individual in the United States according to the law of the state where the federal district court is located. Under New York law, when traditional service is impracticable, a court may direct another method of service.
The court found traditional service impracticable because Komorek already had actual notice of the action, had filed several motions through his attorney, had refused to provide an address for service, and could not otherwise be located by the plaintiffs. The court also found that service by email was likely to reach him because his personal email address was publicly listed with his active membership in the World Association of Detectives. The court found that service through his active, public Instagram and Facebook pages was also appropriate.
The court concluded that email and social-media service were reasonably calculated to notify Komorek of the action and give him an opportunity to present objections. It determined that the other proposed alternative methods were unnecessary.
Rulings
The court granted the plaintiffs’ motion for alternative service. It ordered the plaintiffs to serve Komorek by email, including the listed address and any other email addresses connected to him, and through communications made via Instagram and Facebook.
The court denied without prejudice Komorek’s motion to dismiss for lack of prosecution, pending the October 11 conference. The plaintiffs were ordered to file proof of service by October 10. The Clerk of Court was directed to close the motions at Docket Numbers 38 and 40.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.