Tucker v. Karol

Full title: NORMAN TUCKER, Plaintiff, v. PATRICIA KAROL, Defendant

Court: UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI SOUTHEASTERN DIVISION

Date published: Mar 25, 2015

No. 1:15CV17 SNLJ (E.D. Mo. Mar. 25, 2015)

Opinion

No. 1:15CV17 SNLJ

03-25-2015

NORMAN TUCKER, Plaintiff, v. PATRICIA KAROL, Defendant

STEPHEN N. LIMBAUGH, JR. UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

This matter is before the Court on its own motion. The docket sheet reflects that defendant was served with process on March 11, 2015. However, the United States Marshals Office did not serve process in accordance with Rule 4(e) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Specifically, the Marshals Office served defendant via certified mail, which is not allowed under Rule 4(e). And the person who signed the mail receipt was not defendant. Therefore, the Court will direct the Clerk to modify docket number six to show that summons was returned unexecuted, and the Court will order the Marshals Office to reserve defendant in accordance with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

Accordingly,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Clerk shall modify docket number six to show that summons was returned unexecuted.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk shall issue process on the complaint. The Clerk shall notify the Marshals Office that the first attempt at service did not comply with Rule 4(e), and the Clerk shall direct the Marshals Office to serve defendant in accordance with the Rule.

Dated this 25^th Day of March, 2015.

/s/_________

STEPHEN N. LIMBAUGH, JR.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE