Chambers v. Blickle

Second Circuit

Chambers v. Blickle

312 F.2d 251

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit

DecidedJanuary 7, 1963

DocketNo. 182, Docket 27824

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 312 F.2d 251 (Chambers v. Blickle) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Chambers v. Blickle, 312 F.2d 251 (2d Cir. 1963).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This civil action in which jurisdiction is based on diversity of citizenship, the amount in controversy exclusive of interest and costs exceeding $10,-000, was dismissed because “The allegations of the complaint do not assert the essential factual elements necessary to effect service under the Connecticut civil process statute, Sec. 52-59 (a) against non-resident defendants.” This we hold to be error. No such requirement of pleading in the complaint of the basis for substituted service is found in the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, and would, we think, depart from the spirit of Rule 8(a). On a proper showing, defective purported service may of course be quashed, but defects in service may be waived, or, even after a defective attempted service, effective personal or other service may yet be had. A complaint alleging a claim within the diversity jurisdiction should not be dismissed because it does not also allege the manner in which service is to be accomplished.

Reversed and remanded.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM.

This civil action in which jurisdiction is based on diversity of citizenship, the amount in controversy exclusive of interest and costs exceeding $10,-000, was dismissed because “The allegations of the complaint do not assert the essential factual elements necessary to effect service under the Connecticut civil process statute, Sec. 52-59 (a) against non-resident defendants.” This we hold to be error. No such requirement of pleading in the complaint of the basis for substituted service is found in the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, and would, we think, depart from the spirit of Rule 8(a). On a proper showing, defective purported service may of course be quashed, but defects in service may be waived, or, even after a defective attempted service, effective personal or other service may yet be had. A complaint alleging a claim within the diversity jurisdiction should not be dismissed because it does not also allege the manner in which service is to be accomplished.

Reversed and remanded.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

312 F.2d 251, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/chambers-v-blickle-ca2-1963.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack