HICKSON v. PECO ENERGY

CourtDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania
DecidedOctober 24, 2022
Docket2:22-cv-02053
StatusUnknown

This text of HICKSON v. PECO ENERGY (HICKSON v. PECO ENERGY) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
HICKSON v. PECO ENERGY, (E.D. Pa. 2022).

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA MICHAEL HICKSON : : v. : CIVIL ACTION : No. 22-2053 PECO ENERGY : PATRICK NOONAN SENIOR MANAGER : FINANCE OPERATIONS, ET AL. : McHUGH, J. OCTOBER 24, 2022 MEMORANDUM On September 30, 2022, I ordered Plaintiff to show cause in writing on or before October 14, 2022, why this matter should not be dismissed for failure to make service upon Defendants within 90 days. ECF 9. On October 6, 2022, Plaintiff provided the Court with receipts for FedEx deliveries to Defendants. ECF 10, 11. Because Plaintiff has not submitted an affidavit of service as required by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(l)(1), it is unclear what the packages contained, but I will assume for the purposes of the below discussion that they contained the required summons and complaint. Fed.R.Civ.P. 4(l)(1). According to the receipts, Plaintiff personally mailed the packages to Defendants. Nonetheless, this is improper service of process under the

Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Nor has Plaintiff filed proof that any Defendants have waived service under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(d). Fed.R.Civ.P. 4(d). As a result, I am ordering Plaintiff to cure these defects within thirty days by properly serving each Defendant with both a copy of Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint and a summons and by filing an affidavit signed by the process-server attesting to the proper service of Defendants, or, alternatively, by filing waivers of service signed by Defendants. Fed.R.Civ.P. 4(m). If Plaintiff fails to cure the defective service of process within thirty days, I will be obligated to dismiss this action.

1. Failure to Properly Serve Defendants Rule 4(c)(2) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure provides that a summons and complaint must be served by a “person who is at least 18 years old and not a party.” Fed.R.Civ.P. 4(c)(2) (emphasis added). This rule “is violated when a plaintiff personally attempts to serve a defendant . . . by mail,” as is the case here.1 Olson v. Fed. Election Comm’n, 256 F.R.D. 8, 10 (D.D.C. 2009) (emphasis added); see Constien v. United States, 628 F.3d 1207, 1213 (10th Cir.

2010) (“Even when service is effected by use of the mail, only a nonparty can place the summons and complaint in the mail.”); Kornea v. J.S.D. Mgmt., Inc., 336 F. Supp. 3d 505, 510 (E.D. Pa. 2018) (“Both the federal and state rules require service of original process to be accomplished by an adult who is not a party to the action. There is no exception for this rule for service effectuated via mail or when the Plaintiff is pro se.”). As a result, Plaintiff has not validly served process on Defendants. Even if Plaintiff had contracted a third-party to mail the summons and complaint, rather

than mailing them himself, such service would be improper because, except as permitted by securing a waiver of personal service as set forth below, neither the Federal nor Pennsylvania rules allow for service by mail in this situation. Rule 4(e) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure allows for a non-party as described above to serve a summons and complaint upon an individual in one of three ways:

1 This rule is also violated when a plaintiff personally attempts to serve a defendant by means other than mail, rather than arranging for a third party to complete service of process. (A) delivering a copy of the summons and of the complaint to the individual personally; (B) leaving a copy of each at the individual’s dwelling or usual place of abode with someone of suitable age and discretion who resides there; or (C) delivering a copy of each to an agent authorized by appointment or by law to receive service of process.

Fed.R.Civ.P. 4(e)(2). Likewise, Rule 4(j)(2) provides the following methods for serving a state or local government, including a “state-created governmental organization” like the Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission (“PUC”)2: (A) delivering a copy of the summons and of the complaint to its chief executive officer; or (B) serving a copy of each in the manner prescribed by that state’s law for serving a summons or like process on such a defendant.

Fed.R.Civ.P. 4(j)(2). Finally, Rule 4(h)(1) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure provides the following methods for serving a corporation in a judicial district of the United States: (A) in the manner prescribed by Rule 4(e)(1) for serving an individual; or (B) by delivering a copy of the summons and of the complaint to an officer, a managing or general agent, or any other agent authorized by appointment or by law to receive service of process and—if the agent is one authorized by statute and the statute so requires—by also mailing a copy of each to the defendant.

Fed.R.Civ.P. 4(h)(1). None of the acceptable methods include service by mail. Alternatively, a non-party can deliver service by “following state law for serving a summons in an action brought in courts of general jurisdiction in the state where the district court is located or where service is made,” meaning that Plaintiff could serve Defendants using methods provided for in the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure. Fed.R.Civ.P. 4(e)(1); see also Fed.R.Civ.P. 4(j)(2)(B). Pennsylvania state law, in turn, allows service by the following methods: (1) by handing a copy to the defendant; or

2 It is unclear from Plaintiff’s complaint whether he is suing the PUC as an organization or suing the PUC’s Chairman individually. (2) by handing a copy (i) at the residence of the defendant to an adult member of the family with whom he resides; but if no adult member of the family is found, then to an adult person in charge of such residence; or (ii) at the residence of the defendant to the clerk or manager of the hotel, inn, apartment house, boarding house or other place of lodging at which he resides; or (iii) at any office or usual place of business of the defendant to his agent or to the person for the time being in charge thereof. Pa.R.Civ.P. 402(a).3 Pennsylvania Rule of Civil Procedure 422—which establishes methods of service upon the Commonwealth and its officers and subdivisions—and Pennsylvania Rule of Civil Procedure 424—which establishes methods of service upon corporations and similar entities—likewise do not allow service by mail. Pa.R.Civ.P. 422, 424.

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

Related

Constien v. United States
628 F.3d 1207 (Tenth Circuit, 2010)
Kornea v. J.S.D. Mgmt., Inc.
336 F. Supp. 3d 505 (E.D. Pennsylvania, 2018)
Olson v. Federal Election Commission
256 F.R.D. 8 (D.C. Circuit, 2009)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
HICKSON v. PECO ENERGY, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hickson-v-peco-energy-paed-2022.