Re-Employment Services, Ltd. v. NLAC

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that “courts require strict construction of, and compliance with, the provisions of statutes governing service of process”
• holding that “courts require strict construction of, and compliance with, the provisions of statutes governing service of process”
• holding that defects in the return of service does not divest the trial court of personal jurisdiction over defendants, but instead suspends jurisdiction until the plaintiff submits proper proof of service
• concluding that a return of service was “defective on its face because it not only failed to accurately note the date and time the process came to hand, but also it actually stated that it came to hand before the summonses were even issued.”
• holding that “the trial court was not permitted to presume that the service of process was valid” under section 48.21 where “the return of service was defective on its face because it actually stated that it came to hand before the summonses were even issued”
• stating that, “[w]hen there is an error or omission in the return of service, personal jurisdiction is suspended and it ‘lies dormant’ until proper proof of valid service is submitted”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).