Reading v. United States

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that, by effectuating service on a defendant personally, a pro se plaintiff violated Rule 4 requiring that service be made by any person who was not a party
• holding that, by effectuating service on a defendant personally via certified mail, a pro se plaintiff violated Rule 4 requiring that service be made by any person who was not a party
• finding that Rule 4 does not allow a pro se plaintiff to effectuate service by certified mail himself
• finding that Rule 4’s prohibition against service by a party extends to service by certified mail
• finding no error in granting a motion to set aside default judgment unaccompanied by a verified answer because a motion to dismiss had already been filed
• “[G]ood cause exists for vacatur when the defendant pleads a failure to effect service by the plaintiffs.

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).