Details Matter
June 2, 2013Karen Smith sued Brown Consulting & Associates, her employer, for injuries she sustained during the course of her employment. BCA never appeared, and the trial court entered default judgment in Smith’s favor. On appeal, BCA argued that Smith failed to properly serve it, and that the default judgment should be voided. The Court of Appeals agreed with BCA, finding that the affidavit Smith submitted in suport of her rule 106(b) motion for substitute service of process was defective for two reasons. First, the affidavit did not contain a statement that BCA’s address was the usual place of business of the defendant or its registered agent. Second, the affidavit did not contain a statement that the address is a place where the registered agent could probably be found. Because the Court strictly construes the rules governing service when a default judgment is entered, it reversed the trial court’s entry of default judgment and remanded the case for further proceedings.
