Statia v. Orlet

Summary

The Illinois Appellate Court, Fifth District, held that an out-of-state process server properly served Christine Orlet by leaving the summons near her screen door after identifying her and determining that she was evading service. The court concluded that the return of service and testimony established personal jurisdiction and that the trial court improperly vacated Harry Statia’s default judgment under section 2-1401. The court reversed and remanded, finding Statia’s remaining appellate issue moot.

Holdings

1. Personal service may be accomplished by placing the summons and related papers in the general vicinity of an unwilling defendant and announcing the nature of the papers; physical placement directly in the defendant's hand is not required. Under the circumstances, leaving the papers just outside Orlet's screen door was sufficient personal service.
2. The return of service complied with sections 2-203 and 2-208 because it identified the person served, stated the place, date, time, and manner of service, and used a certification substantially similar to the certification required by section 1-109; notarization was not required.
3. A return of service is prima facie evidence of proper service and may be impeached only by clear and convincing evidence, including affirmative evidence; Orlet's assertion that the documents were left on her porch did not rebut the presumption.
4. Statia's challenge to the denial of his motion to dismiss Orlet's section 2-1401 petition was moot because reversal of the order granting the petition eliminated the basis for that issue.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the Oregon process server's act of leaving the summons and petition outside Orlet's screen door constituted valid personal service under Illinois law.
2. Whether the process server's nonnotarized return of service affidavit complied with the affidavit and certification requirements for out-of-state service.
3. Whether the circuit court obtained personal jurisdiction over Orlet and therefore erred in vacating the default judgment as void.
4. Whether Statia's challenge to the denial of his motion to dismiss Orlet's section 2-1401 petition remained justiciable after reversal of the order vacating the default judgment.

Disposition

reversed_and_remanded