Kurka v. Iowa County, Iowa

How courts have described this case

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

• explaining that dismissal may not be appropriate if the plaintiff has acted diligently in trying to effect service or there are understandable mitigating circumstances
• explaining that “good cause” for failure to serve a defendant requires at least 22 excusable neglect and is dependent upon the facts of the individual case
• explaining that dismissal may not be appropriate where for example the plaintiff's failure to complete service in timely fashion is a result of the conduct of a third person
• explaining that a “showing of good cause requires at least ‘excusable neglect’—good faith and some reasonable basis for noncompliance with the rules.” (quoting Adams v. AlliedSignal Gen. Aviation Avionics, 74 F.3d 882, 887 (8th Cir. 1996))
• discussing that “Rule 4(m) does not define good cause, and courts have not given conclusive meaning to the phrase,” listing factors to be considered, and stating that “[w]hether or not [good cause] has been satisfied is largely dependent upon the facts of each individual case”
• in considering whether to grant a discretionary extension under Rule 4(m), a “particularly important” factor is “the possibility of prejudice to the defendant”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).