ESCO Corp. v. Manley

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• reiterating that the Sixth Circuit “will not allow actual knowledge of a lawsuit to substitute for proper service under Fed. R. Civ. P. 4”
• noting that the federal rules do not contemplate service by mail
• service was not perfected under Rule 2.105(A)(2) because the defendant did not sign the return receipt
• service was not perfected under Rule 2.105(A)(2) because the defendant did not sign the return receipt
• “Delivery was not restricted to the addressee, . . . . Thus, it appears that Dortch did not effectively serve Csolkovits with 5 process under state or federal procedure.”
• “Delivery was not restricted to the addressee, nor did Csolkovits sign the receipt or otherwise acknowledge receipt of the service. Thus, it appears that Dortch did not effectively serve Csolkovits with process under state or federal procedure.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).