Wilson v. Ribbens

How courts have described this case

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

• recognizing that “good cause is likely (but not always) to be found when the plaintiff’s failure to complete service in a timely fashion is a result of the conduct of a third person, typically the process server. . . .”
• concluding “the district court erred in failing to correctly recognize that an agreement not to effect timely service may constitute ‘good cause’ for failing to 6 effect service within the ninety-day period required by the rules of civil procedure” (emphasis added)
• noting “[i]n a limited number of circumstances, however, resort to matters outside the pleadings is permissible on 5 a motion to dismiss”
• noting motions to dismiss are limited to the pleadings but “[s]ummary judgment is the appropriate remedy when parties wish to rely on facts outside the pleadings” (alteration in original) (citation omitted)
• discussing cases considering the doctrine of estoppel in the service of process context
• noting “we have long required plaintiffs to justify certain delays in service”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).