Martin v. Big Apple Deli, LLC

2 Citing cases

  1. Mitchell v. City of Charlotte

    3:23-cv-00006-RJC-SCR (W.D.N.C. Mar. 1, 2024)   Cited 2 times

    District courts possess discretion to decide the best course of action for disposing of motions for insufficient service. Martin v. Big Apple Deli, 671 Fed. App'x. 48, 48 (4th Cir. 2016) (citing Cardenas v. City of Chicago, 646 F.3d 1001, 1004 (7th Cir. 2011)). Defendants state that they are without knowledge sufficient to form a belief as to whether Defendants Jennings and Martinez have been properly served pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4.

  2. McCall v. Flagship Credit Acceptance

    Civil Action 4:21-cv-00014 (W.D. Va. Feb. 1, 2022)

    “If, on its own or on the defendant's motion, the district court finds that the plaintiff has not met that burden and lacks good cause for not perfecting service, the district court must either dismiss the suit or specify a time within which the plaintiff must serve the defendant.” Cardenas v. City of Chicago, 646 F.3d 1001, 1005 (7th Cir. 2011) (citing Fed.R.Civ.P. 4(m)); see also Martin v. Big Apple Deli, LLC, 671 Fed.Appx. 48, 48 (4th Cir. 2016) (mem.) (per curiam) (citing Cardenas). III.