Legal Schnauzer publisher Roger Shuler released after more than 5 months in Alabama jail

[Jim Lane]

11. There are some circumstances under which service is invalid if procured by fraud.

This is stuff I read long ago, and I may well have the details wrong, but I think what happened was that P brought suit against D and wanted to serve D with process in the state where the case was pending, so that the court would have jurisdiction. D lived in a different state. P caused a false communication to be sent to D, telling D that D had qualified for some sort of award to be given at a banquet in the state. D fell for it, showed up at the site of the supposed banquet, and was served with process. IIRC the service was held invalid.

From the Times article you linked, I see two bases for service on Shuler. First, someone came to his house (his correct address) at a time when he was there, but he wouldn't take the papers. Second,

a member of the Sheriff’s Department pulled them over, saying they had run a stop sign. The officer then served them the papers, which the Shulers refused to accept, contending that service under such a pretext was improper.

That second one is unclear to me. If Shuler and his wife didn't actually run a stop sign, there was an element of pretext, but his presence within Alabama (and hence his being subject to service there) didn't arise from fraud. Also, aside from the stop sign issue, I don't know whether Alabama law allows a deputy to pull someone over solely to serve legal papers, especially when that person has been evading judicial process.

The first case, though, seems pretty clear. A party to a lawsuit can't thwart the court's jurisdiction just through obstinacy. I don't know Alabama law, but here's how it would be handled in New York (under Civil Practice Law and Rules 308): The process server goes to the correct address and attempts to serve Shuler personally. If Shuler won't come to the door, the process server can leave the papers with his wife, or with some other person "of suitable age and discretion". If no such person comes to the door, the process server tries again some other time. If reasonable efforts fail (try more than once, and not always at the same time of day, for example try at least once in the early evening in case the person works during the day), then the process server can affix the papers to the door of the house. If the papers aren't personally handed to Shuler, but given to some other person or affixed to the door, then a copy must also be sent to Shuler by first-class mail. (These alternative methods of service, for someone who won't come to the door or who actually isn't home, are known colloquially as "leave and mail" and "nail and mail", respectively.)

If you like reading legal stuff and you want all the details that I've glossed over, the state court in Manhattan offers a handy guide on "How to Serve Legal Papers"; search for 308 to get to the relevant part.

Alabama law probably differs in some particulars but it's inconceivable to me that there would not be some procedure to accomplish the same goal. Roger Shuler is not the first Alabamian to wish that a lawsuit against him would just go away. I'm sure the courts there can't be stymied just because a litigant petulantly refuses to come to the door.

Now, IF Alabama law is like New York's and IF the people trying to serve Shuler were so ticked off that they got impatient and didn't adhere to all the procedural requirements (such as a follow-up mailing), thus invalidating the first service, and IF the Shulers didn't actually run a stop sign and IF the deputy's pulling them over on a false pretext constitutes a fraud that voids the second service, THEN he might have some sort of case about the service of the order. Of course, all that gets him is that they'll re-serve him properly.

Final thought: The article you linked makes me think that struggle4progress and I were both looking at this a little too simplistically. It's not just a matter of persuading Shuler to hire a lawyer. There's also the problem of persuading a lawyer to take the case. Based on what's in that article, I would see a strong likelihood that, not all that far down the road, Shuler would be suing any lawyer he hired. As his retained-then-fired-then-sued lawyer, I would expect to win the case he brought against me, but who needs that aggravation.