Opinion
No. 02 C 5371
August 12, 2003
OPINION
Before me is Defendant Zeola Thomas and John Chandler's Motion to Quash Service. On or about June 9, 2003, an unidentified person delivered to the law offices of Kipnis Kahn, Ltd., documents entitled, Summons in a Civil Case, Notice of Filing and Fourth Amended Complaint, naming as Defendants, Thomas and Chandler. Thomas and Chandler neither reside nor are employed at the offices of Kipnis Kahn, Ltd. Defendants filed an Entry of Special Appearance to challenge the personal jurisdiction of the court in this matter on the ground that the plaintiff failed to properly serve upon them the summons and complaint.
Service upon an attorney is not effective under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(e)(2) unless the attorney has either express or implied authority to receive service on his behalf. Schultz v. Schultz, 436 F.2d 635 (7th Cir. 1971); see also Wright Miller, Federal Practice Procedure: Civil 3d § 1097 at 538-539 (2002). Here, there is no factual basis to believe that such authorization has occurred. Thomas and Chandler unequivocally stated that Kipnis Kahn, Ltd. is not and has not been authorized by either of them to accept service of summons on their behalf.
Accordingly, Thomas and Chandler's Motion to Quash is GRANTED.