Soto v. City of Concord

How courts have described this case

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

• explaining that the plaintiff “did not effectuate valid service of process on [the defendant] when it personally served [a vice president] in England”
• stating that, because “Roboserve did not receive actual notice of this action through the mailing to its Canadian business address,” the court “cannot find that the mailing to Canada accomplished valid service”
• \Canada has affirmatively stated that it does not object to service by postal channels under Article 10(a)\
• “The recommended provincial Central Authority for Ontario, where [defendant] is located, is [the] Ministry of the Attorney General for Ontario . . . .” (internal quotation marks omitted)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).