BURLISON
v.
ROGERS

M.D. Fla. | 2022-09-01
No. 6:13-CV-1561
2013 WL 6065759 District Court, M.D. Florida (2022) Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 cases

AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.

Holding

The court held that service of process was insufficient as it was not made on the named defendant and granted the motion to quash.

Facts & Procedural History

Plaintiff filed a complaint and issued a summons for the named defendant, Circuit Court Judge Steven G. Rogers. A non-named party, the Florida Attorne…

The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.

Topics
Rule 4 Federal Rule Of Civil Procedure 4 Jurisdictional Requirement Motion To Quash

Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Rule 4 cases and more on FLexlaw

Opinion of the Court

Before this Court is a motion to quash service of process filed by a non-named party, Ashley Moody, Florida Attorney General. (Doc. 5). Although the motion is opposed, it is apparent from the motion and summons that the requirements for service as set forth in the Federal Rules of Civil procedure have not been met. Id.; (Doc. 2); see Fed. R. Civ. P. 4. A summons was only issued for the sole named Defendant, Circuit Court Judge Steven G. Rogers, and service of process is insufficient if on anyone besides him, including Attorney General Moody.1

PHILIP R. LAMMENS

United States Magistrate Judge Copies furnished to: Counsel of Record Unrepresented Parties

* Notably, a plaintiff has within 90 days of filing the complaint (here Plaintiff filed his complaint on August 22, 2022) to complete service of process. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m).

Footnotes
1 “Service of process is a jurisdictional requirement: a court lacks jurisdiction over the person of a defendant when that defendant has not been served.” Pardazi v. Cullman Med. Ctr., 896 F. 2d 1313, 1317 (11th Cir. 1990). “[T]he Court has broad discretion to dismiss the action or to quash service but retain the case when service of process is insufficient.” Callaway v. Kittler, No. 6:13-CV-1561-ORL-22, 2013 WL 6065759, at *1 (M.D. Fla. Nov. 18, 2013). Accordingly, the motion to quash service of process (Doc. 5) is GRANTED. The service of process shown by the Attorney General’s motion on August 29, 2022 (Doc. 5-1) is QUASHED.’ DONE and ORDERED in Ocala, Florida on September 1, 2022.

Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus

Citator

Cited By

  • Burlison v. Rogers, 2013 WL 6065759 (M.D. Fla. 2022)
    …dazi v. Cullman Med. Ctr., 896 F. 2d 1313, 1317 (11th Cir. 1990). “[T]he Court has broad discretion to dismiss the action or to quash service but retain the case when service of process is insufficient.” Callaway v. Kittler, No. 6:13-CV-1561-ORL-22, 2013 WL 6065759, at *1 (M.D. Fla. Nov. 18, 2013). Accordingly, the motion to quash service of process (Doc. 5) is GRANTED. The service of process shown by the Attorney General’s motion on August 29, 2022 (Doc. 5-1) is QUASHED.’ DONE and ORDERED in Ocala, Flori…
  • Daniel v. Concord Advice, LLC (M.D. Fla. 2020)
    …nsufficient service of process. Fed. R. Civ. Pro. 12(b)(5). “But, the Court ‘has broad discretion to dismiss the action or to quash service but retain the case’ when service of process is insufficient.” Callaway v. Kittler, No. 6:13-CV-1561-ORL-22, 2013 WL 6065759, at *1 (M.D. Fla. Nov. 18, 2013) (quoting Thermo–Cell Southeast, Inc. v. Technetic Indus., Inc., 605 F. Supp. 1122, 1124 (N.D. Ga. 1985)). “In actions removed from state court, the sufficiency of service of process prior to removal is determined by…
    1 / 2

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw