William J. Tuke 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.

• finding that even if Rule 4(i)(3) were applicable, plaintiffs lack of diligence in effecting proper service of the United States was not reasonable
• stating that a plaintiff must MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER - 8 comply with both prongs of 4(i)(1) “for good reason: that’s what the rule says”
• stating that a plaintiff must comply with both prongs of 4(i)(1) “for good reason: that’s what the rule says”
• stating that a plaintiff must comply with both prongs of 4(i)(1) \for good reason: that’s what the rule says\
• stating of creditor’s counsel “Failure to read a rule is the antithesis of good cause.”
• upholding dismissal and observing that “an attorney who files suit when the statute of limitations is about to expire must take special care to achieve timely service of process, because a slip-up is fatal”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).