Rynn v. Jennings

• Court: District Court, D. Arizona
• Decided: December 5, 2024
• Docket: 4:24-cv-00594
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

1 WO 2 3 4 5 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

9 Richard Rynn, et al., No. CV-24-02674-PHX-JGZ

10 Plaintiffs, ORDER

11 v.

12 Craig Jennings, et al.,

13 Defendants. 14 15 On October 15, 2024, Plaintiffs Richard Rynn, Gelliana David Rynn, and Marcella 16 Rynn filed a Motion for Alternative Service to Serve Defendant Lynn McLean. (Doc. 39.) 17 On November 22, 2024, Plaintiffs filed a Motion for Expedited Ruling on Plaintiffs’ 18 Motion for Alternative Service to Lynn McLean and Extension of Time to Serve. (Doc. 19 98.) Plaintiffs request authorization to serve McLean by affixing documents to McLean’s 20 front door because McLean has been actively evading service, according to the professional 21 process server hired by Plaintiffs, and refused to accept delivery of the summons and 22 complaint via certified mail. (See Docs. 39, 98.) For the following reasons, the Court will 23 grant Plaintiffs’ motions for alternative service and an extension of time to serve Defendant 24 McLean. 25 1. Service Impracticable 26 Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(e)(1) provides, in part, that “[u]nless federal law 27 provides otherwise, an individual ... may be served in a judicial district of the United States 28 by: (1) following state law for serving a summons in an action brought in courts of general 1 jurisdiction in the state where the district court is located or where service is made....” Fed. 2 R. Civ. P. 4(e)(1). Under Arizona law, an individual may be served by delivering the 3 summons and complaint personally; leaving the documents at the defendants’ “dwelling or 4 usual place of abode” with “someone of suitable age and discretion who resides there”; or 5 delivering it to an agent authorized by law or appointment. Ariz. R. Civ. P. 4.1(d). If a party 6 shows that the means of service provided in Rule 4.1 is “impracticable, the court may—on 7 motion and without notice to the person to be served—order that service may be 8 accomplished in another manner.” Id. at 4.1(k). Impracticability requires “something less 9 than a complete inability to serve the defendant” or “the ‘due diligence’ showing required 10 before service by publication may be utilized.” Blair v. Burgener, 245 P.3d 898, 901, 903– 11 04 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2010). The fact that traditional service under Rule 4.1(d) would be 12 “extremely difficult or inconvenient” suffices. Id. at 903. 13 Based on the professional process server’s inability to effectuate service on Mclean 14 and statement that McLean is actively evading service, the Court finds that traditional 15 service would be impracticable. 16 2. Alternative Means 17 If traditional service methods prove impracticable, a court can order that service be 18 accomplished in another manner. Ariz. R. Civ. P. 4.1(k)(1). Process papers posted on a 19 front door and sent by mail have been found to be appropriate alternative methods of 20 21 service under Arizona law. See DPG Invs. LLC v. Anderson, No. CV-20-01386-PHX- 22 DWL, 2020 WL 8482971, at *3 (D. Ariz. Dec. 15, 2020); Baker v. Nw. Mut. Life Ins. Co., 23 No. CV-21-00064-TUC-JGZ, at *3 (D. Ariz. Oct. 8, 2021). Plaintiffs, prior to filing their 24 motion for alternative service, attempted to serve McLean via certified mail but she refused 25 to accept. (Doc. 39 at 6.) Thus, the Court will grant Plaintiffs’ request to serve McLean by 26 posting process papers on McLean’s front door. Plaintiffs must make a reasonable effort 27 to provide the Defendants with actual notice of the action's commencement and must mail 28 the summons, the complaint, and the court order authorizing an alternative means of service 1 || at McLean’s last-known residential address. Ariz. R. Civ. P. 4.1(k)(2). Accordingly, 2 IT IS ORDERED: 3 1. Plaintiffs’ Motion for Alternative Service to Serve Defendant Lynn McLean 4|| (Doc. 39) is granted. Plaintiffs may serve McLean by affixing documents to McLean’s 5|| front door. Plaintiffs must also mail the summons, the complaint, and this court order 6|| authorizing an alternative means of service, via regular or first-class mail, to McLean’s 7|| last-known residential address. 8 2. Plaintiffs’ Motion for Extension of Time to Serve Defendant Lynn McLean 9|| (Doc. 98) is granted. Plaintiffs have until January 17, 2025 to effectuate service on || McLean in the above-stated manner. 11 Dated this 5th day of December, 2024. 12 8 facmot_ Jopp 14 Jennifer G. Zh ps 15 Chiet United States District Judge 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

-3-