I N T H E SUPR EM E C O UR T O F M I SS I SS I PPI NO. 2 0 0 5 - I A- 0 0 2 7 7 - S CT AAR ON B. BEN NE TT

v. REBEC CA Mc CAFFR EY

D A T E O F JU D G M E N T : 01/ 24/ 2005 T RI AL J UDGE : HON. WI NS T ON L
. KI DD COURT F ROM W HI CH APP EAL ED: HI NDS COUNTY CI RCUI T COURT A T T O R N E Y F O R A P P E L L A N T : H
. W E S L E Y W IL L IA M S , III AT T OR NE Y F OR AP P E L L E E : RE BE CC A G. T AYL OR NATURE OF THE CAS E: CI VI L - P ERS ONA L I NJ URY D I SPO SI T I O N : A FFIRM E D A N D R E M A N D E D - 06/ 29/ 2006 M OT I ON F OR RE HE AR I NG F I L E D: M ANDAT E I S S UE D:

B E F O R E C O B B , P . J. , C A R L SO N A N D G R A V E S, JJ. GR AVES, J UST I CE, FOR TH E COU RT: ¶1. T his interlocu tory ap p ea l ar i s es fr om a four

- vehi cl e ac ci dentw hi ch occ ur r ed on J anuary 8, 2000, i n H ancoc k C ount y , M i s s i s s i ppi
. A ar on B
. B ennett( B ennett ) fi l ed a M ot i on to D ism iss th e c o m p lain t o f R e b e c c a M c C a f

f re y(M c C a f

f re y ) b e c a u se M c C a f

f re ya lleg e d ly f a iled to sh o w g o o d c a u se a s to w h yp ro c e ss w a s n o t se rv e d in a tim e lym a n n e r. B e n n e tt fur t heral l eged thatM cC aff r eydi d notdemonst r at e excus abl e negl ect t o al l ow foraddi t i onal t i m e t o serve process .He nry Phe l ps own e d the car th atDani e l E. T uc kerwa s dr i vin g. 1 May 7, 20 03, w as 1 20 day s after the co m plaint w as filed. 2 

### 2

F ACT S AND P ROCE DURAL HI S TORY ¶ 2
. O n Ja n u a ry 8 , 2 0 0 0 , a f o u r ve h icle a u to m o b ile ac c id e n t o c c u rre d o n H ig h w a y 6 0 3 in H an co ck C o u n ty , M issi ssipp i. T h e f ir st tw o ca rs w ere d ri v en b y D an iel E
. T u ck er (T u ck er)

a n d W a l t e rF
. M a d e l e y( Ma d e l e y )
. S o o n a f t e rTu c k e ra n d M a d e l e yh a d c o l l i d e d , Be n n e t tc a me
u p o n t h e s c e n e a n d r a n i n t o t h e t wo a l r e a d ywr e c k e d v e h i c l e s . Th e r e a f t e r , M c Ca f

f r e yc a me
u p o n t h e s c e n e a n d a l s o c o l l i d e d w i t h t h e o t h e rt h r e e v e h i c l e s i n t h e h i g h w a y. ¶ 3
. O n J a n u a r y 7 , 2 0 0 3 , M c C a f f r e y f i l e d h e r c o m p l a i n t a g a i n s t B e n n e t , T u c k e r , M a d e l e y, Phel ps , and her i ns ur ance company , U SF& G
. O n t he same day , s um m ons es w er e i s s ued by

1
t he H i nds C ount yC i r cui tC l er k. O n M ar ch 11, 2003, a H ancoc k C ount ySher i ff’ s O ffi cer
a ttem p ted to se rv e B e n n e tt an d lea rn e d th a t B e n n e tt h a d m o v e d o r th e a d d re ss w a s in c o rre c t. M cC aff r eyw as onl yabl e t o s er ve U SF& G , herow n i ns ur ance company , w i t hi n t he or i gi nal 1 2 0 d a ytim e p e rio d
. O n A p ril 2 9 , 2 0 0 3 , p u rsu a n t to a m o tio n f iled b yM c C a f

f re y , the c irc u it 2

cour tgr ant ed a 60 da yext ens i on fors er vi ce of pr oces s . O n J une 24, 2003, M cC aff r eyi s s ued

a su b p o e n a o n th e C o m m iss io n e r o f In su ra n c e in a n e f

f o rt to se rv e B e n n e tt’s i n su re r t o o b tain i nform ati on on hi s w her eabout s . O n J une 25, 2003, t he C om m i s s i onerof I ns ur ance f o rw a rd e d th e su b p o e n a to B e n n e tt’s in su re r. O n Ju n e 3 0 , 2 0 0 3 , M c C a f f r e y a ttem p ted to

serv e B en n ettb yp u b li ca ti o n . O n Ju ly6 , 2 0 0 3 , the f ir st ex tens ion g ran ted by the circu itco u rt

e x p ir e d
.

### 3

¶4. O n O ct ober6, 2003, pur s uantt o a mot i on fi l ed byM cC aff r ey , t he ci r cui tcour t gr ant ed

an ad d it i onal ext ens i on of t i m e t o s er ve B ennett
. O n O ct ober22, 2003, B ennettw as per s onal l ys er ved. O n N ovember 6, 2003, B ennett fi l ed a M ot i on t o D i s m i s s w i t h t he H i nds C o u n tyC ir cu itC o u rt , p u rsua n t t o the M issi ssipp i R u les o f C ivil P roc ed u re 4 (h), 12 (b)(4 ), 1 2 ( b ) ( 5 ) , a n d 1 2 ( b ) ( 6 )
. On De c e mbe r5 , 2 0 0 3 , t h e s e c o n d e x t e n s i o n o f t i me e x p i r e d
. On Jan u ary2 7 , 2 0 0 4 , M cC af fre yfil ed h er resp o n se to B en n ett ’s M o ti o n to D ism iss. O n F eb rua ry 4, 2 0 0 4 , Be n n e t t f

i l e d h i s r e p l y i n s u p p o r t o f h i s M o t i o n t o Di s mi s s . Th e p a r t i es pr es ent ed

or al ar gum ent s on t he M ot i on on February 19, 2004. O n J une 7, 2004, t he ci r cui tcour tdeni ed B ennet t ’ s M ot i on t o D i s m i s s . O n J anuary24, 2005, B ennettfi l ed hi s Pet i t i on forC er t i fi cat i on forI nt er l ocut or yA ppeal w i t h t he ci r cui t cour t
. T he same day , t he ci r cui tcour tj udge s i gned

an d en tere d an A m en d ed O rde r D en y ing D ef en d an t’ s M o ti o n to D ism iss an d P lai n ti ff ’s M ot i on forD efa ul t and D eny i ng C er t i fi cat i on forI nt er l ocut or yA ppeal
. O n February7, 2005, B e n n e tt f

il e d h is P e tit io n f

o r In ter lo c u to ryA p p e a l w ith th is C o u rt. O n M a rc h 9 , 2 0 0 5 , this C our tgr ant ed B ennett ’ s Pet i t i on forI nt er l ocut or yA ppeal
. H ow ever , M cC aff r eyar gues t hat B e n n e tt i s n o t en tit led to a n in ter lo c u to rya p p e a l b e c a u s e B e n n e tt fa iled to se e k tim e ly

ce rt ifi ca ti o n fo r his interl o cu toryap p ea l from the circu it co u rt
. F u rth erm o re, on interl o cu tory app eal , B enn et tt his cou rtw i t h tw o is sues: I. D i d the C i rcui tC ou rterri n d eny i ng defe nd an t ’s m oti on t o d i sm i ss beca us e the pl ai nt i ff f

ai l ed t o s ho w good caus e as t o w hypr oces s w as nots er ved w i t hi n t he t i m e al l ow ed byR ul e 4 (h) and the ext ens i ons g ra n ted b yth e C irc u it C o u rt? II
. D i d the C i rcui t C ou rt erri n d eny i ng t he d efen dan t ’s m oti on t o d i sm i ss

### 4 beca us e the pl ai nt i ff di d notdemonst r at e exc us abl e negl ectt o al l ow for addi t i onal t i m e t o s er ve proc es s , w her e sai d r eques ton O ct ober6, 2003 wa s ma d e n i n e t y - t wo ( 9 2 ) d a y s a f t e rt h e e x p i r a t i o n of t he fi r s tt i me e x t e n s i o n ? DI S CU S S I ON W h e th e r B e n n e tt fa il to se e k tim e ly c e r t ifica tio n fo r h is inte rloc u tor y a p p ea l f ro m th e c ircu it co u rt. ¶ 5
. M c C a f

f re y m a k e s th e a rg u m e n t th a t B e n n e tt f a iled to tim e ly se e k c e rtific a tio n f o r h is in ter lo c u to rya p p e a l f

ro m th e c irc u it co u rt. S p e c if ica lly , M c C a f

f re ysta tes th a t th e c irc u it

cour tent er ed an or derdeny i ng B ennett ’ s M ot i on t o D i s m i s s on J une 7, 2004. M cC aff r ey fur t herar gues , i tw as notunt i l J anuary24, 2005, t hatB ennettfi l ed hi s Pet i t ion for C e rtific a tio n f

o r In ter lo c u to ryA p p e a l w ith th e c irc u it c o u r t se e k in g to a p p e a l th e c irc u it

cour t ’ s J une 7, 2004 rul i ng. M cC aff r ey ’ s pos i t i on i s t hatB ennett had four t een da y s fr om t he ci r cui tcour t ’ s deni al of hi s M o ti o n to D ismi s s i n w hi ch t o fi l e hi s pet i t i on forcert i fi cat i on
w i t h t he ci r cui tcour t an d h e d id notdo s o. B ennettcorr ect l yar gues t hatbeca us e t he A m e n d e d O rd e r D e n y in g D e f e n d a n t’s M o tio n to D ism iss a n d P lain tiff ’s M o tio n f o r D e f a u lt and D eny i ng C er t i fi cat i on forI nt er l ocut or y A p p eal w as fi l ed on J anuary24, 2005, and he f iled h is P e tit io n f

o r In ter lo c u to ryA p p e a l o n F e b r u a ry7 , 2 0 0 5 , ex a c tly1 4 d a y s la ter , h is pet i t i on t o t hi s C our ti s t i m el y . T he over al l cont ent i on b etw ee n t he part i es conce r ns t he iden ti fica ti o n o f th e p arti cu lar “o rde r” ref erred to in R u le 5(a ). ¶6. T hi s C our tamended R ul e 5( a) of t he M i s s i s s i ppi R ul es of A ppel l at e Pr ocedur e i n 2005 t o eli m i nate t he r equ i rem ent that a pet i t i on er s eek ce rt i fi cat i on for an int erl ocu t oryapp eal fi rs t

### 5

f r o m t h e t r i a l c o u r t
. A p e t i t i o n e r ma y n o w s e e k i n t e r l o c u t o r ya p p e a l d i r e c t l yf r o m t h e S u p r e me C our tbyfi l i ng a pet i t i on w i t hi n t w enty - one (21) day s fol l ow i ng t he ent r y of t he or derw hi ch t he pet i t i oners ubm i t s for i nt er l ocut or y r evi ew . T hi s amendm ent i s appl i cabl e onl yt o pet i t i ons fil ed o n o r af

ter M arc h 1 , 2 0 0 5
. B en n ettfil ed h is Pe ti ti o n fo r Interl o cu toryA p p ea l on Jan u ary 2 4 , 2 0 0 5 . T h e re f

o re , the 2 0 0 4 , rath e r th a n th e 2 0 0 5 , rev isio n o f th e R u les o f A p p e llate Pr ocedur e i s appl i cabl e i n t hi s m at t er . T he 2004 r evi s i on of R ul e 5( a) of t he M i s s i s s i ppi R ul es of A pp el l at e P rocedu re s t at es: (a) P e ti ti o n fo r P e r m is s io n to A p p e a l. A n appea l fr om an i nt er l ocut or yor der m ay be s oughti f t he or dergr ant s ordeni es cer ti

f i cati on bythe tr i al cour tt hat a su b sta n tial b a sis e x ists f o r a d if f e re n c e o f o p in io n o n a q u e stio n o f law a s to w h i c h a p p e l l a t e r e s o l u t i o n m a y: ( 1) M at er i al l y advanc e t he t er m i nat i on of t he l i t i gat i on and avoi d exce pt i onal ex p en se to the p arti es; o r ( 2) Pr ot ecta part yfr om s ubs t ant i al and i r r epar abl e i nj ur y ; or ( 3) R es ol ve an i s s ue of ge ner al i m por t ance i n t he admi ni s t r at i on of j us t i ce. A p p e a l f ro m su c h a n o rd e r m a y b e so u g h t b yf ili n g a p e tit io n f

o r p e rm iss io n to a p p e a l w ith th e c ler k o f th e S u p re m e C o u rt w ithin 14 days aft ert he entr yof such order i n t he t r i al cour tw i t h p roo f o f serv i ce on a l l ot herpar t i es t o t he act i on i n t he t r i al cour t
. A n or derm aybe am ended t o i ncl ude the pr es cr i bed cert i fi cat i on ordeni al atanyt i m e, and perm i s s i on t o appea l m aybe s ought w ith in 1 4 d a y s a f

te r e n tr yo f

th e o rd e r a s a m e n d e d
. M is s . R . A p p . P . 5 (a ) ( e m p h a s is a d d e d ). ¶ 7
. B a se d o n th e in f o rm a tio n a v a ilab le in th e 2 0 0 4 re v isio n o f R u le 5 (a ), th e a p p ro p ria te

or derdat e by w hi ch t o m eas ur e t he t i m el i nes s of B ennett ’ s appea l w oul d be J anuary24, 2005, b ec au s e this i s the d ate the A m en d ed O rde r D en y ing D ef en d an t’ s M o ti o n an d P lai n ti ff ’s M ot i on forD efa ul t , and D eny i ng C er t i fi cat i on forI nt er l ocut o ryA ppeal w as fi l ed.

### 6

M cC affrey ’s con t enti on t hat J un e 7, 20 04 , repr esent s t he ap propri at e order dat e i s er roneou s. T he ci r cui tcour tent er ed an or der deny i ng B ennett ’ s M ot i on t o D i s m i s s on t hi s par t i cul ardat e. H ow ever , t he ci r cui tcour t di d not ent er i t s or derdeny i ng cert i fi cat i on unt i l J anuary24, 2005. B ennet tfi l ed hi s Pet i t i on forI nt er l ocut or yA p p ea l w i t h t hi s C our ton February7, 2005,

e x a c tly 1 4 d a y s la te r. T h e re f o re , B e n n e tt’ s p e titio n to th is C o u rt is tim e ly. St andard of R evi ew ¶8. T o t he degr ee thata t r i al j udge’ s deci s i on t o gr antordenya mot i on foran ext ens i on of t i m e i s bas ed upon a pr ece ptof l aw , t he st andar d for t hi s C our t ’ s r evi ew s hal l be “pl enary ”;

o th e rw ise th is C o u rt sh a ll a p p ly th e a b u se -o f -d isc re tio n sta n d a rd
. W h ich sta n d a rd to a p p lyis a d ec isi o n to b e m ad e o n an ad h o c b as is
. R a i n s v . G a r dn e r , 73 1 S o. 2d 11 92 , 11 98 (M i ss. 1999)
. W hen r evi ew i ng fac t
- bas ed find i ngs , t hi s C our tw i l l onl yexami ne w hethert he tr i al

cour tabus ed i t s di s cr et i on and w heth er there w as s ubs t ant i al evi dence s uppor t i ng t he d e te rm in a tio n . T

r ip le C T r a n s p o r t, I n c . v . D ic k e n s, 8 7 0 S o . 2 d 1 1 9 5 , 1 1 9 7 -98 (M iss. 2 0 0 4 ). I n t hi s cas e, t he ci r cui t cour t j udge di d not bas e hi s deci s i on upon a ques t i on of l aw , t her efor e,
a n a b u s e o f

d is c re tio n s ta n d a rd w ill a p p ly. I . W he t h e r t h e Ci r c u i t C our t e r r e d i n de nyi ng d efe ndan t ’ s m ot i on t o di s m i s s becaus e t he pl ai nt i ff f ai l ed t o s how good cause as t o w hy proces s w as not s e r ve d w i t h i n t h e t i me a l l o w e d b y Ru l e 4 ( h ) a n d t he fi rst 6 0 -d a y ex ten sion g ra n ted b y th e C ircu it C o u rt. ¶9. B ennettar gues he w as nott i m el y s er ved w i t h a copyof t he s um m ons and compl ai nt

as r equ i red byR ule 4( h) of t he M i ssi ssi pp i R ules of C i vil P rocedu re. R ule 4( h) provi des:

### 7

(h ) S u m m o n s : T im e L im it F o r S e r v ic e . I f a s er vi ce of t he s um m ons and compl ai nti s notm ade upon a defe ndantw i t hi n 120 day s aft ert he fi l i ng of t he compl ai nt and t he par t y on w hos e behal f s uch s er vi ce w as r equi r ed ca nnots how g o o d c a u se w h y su c h se rv ice w a s n o t m a d e w ith in th a t p e rio d , the a c tio n sh a ll b e d i s mi s s e d a s t o t h a td e f e n d a n t wi t h o u tp r e

j u d i c e u p o n t h e Co u r t ’ s o wn m ot i on w i t h not i ce t o s uch part yorupon m ot i on. M i ss. R
. C i v. P
. 4(h). M cC affrey ’s com plai nt w as fi l ed o n Janu ary7, 20 03
. S he h ad 1 20 day s,
orunt i l M ay7, 2003, t o s er ve a copyof t he s um m ons and compl ai nt
. Pr i ort o t he expi r at i on of t he 120 dayper i od, M cC aff r eyfi l ed a mot i on t o ext end thi s per i od by 6 0 d ay s. I n her

mo t i o n , s h e s t a t e d t h a t h e r a t t e mp t s t o s e r v e a l l f o u r o f t h e d e f

e n d a n t s we r e u n s u c c e s s f u l
. As to B e n n e tt, th e p ro o f

o f se rv ice sta ted “ U n e x e c u ted - su b jec t h a s m o v e d - in c o rre c t stre e t # 3 /11 /03
. ” T h e c ir cu itco u rtg ran ted th is m o ti o n o n A p ri l 2 9 , 2 0 0 3
. B ase d o n this ord er, M cC aff r eyhad unt i l J ul y6, 2003 t o eff ectuat e s er vi ce. D ur i ng t hi s t i m e, M cC aff r eyeven at t empt ed pr oces s bypubl i cat i on by publ i s hi ng t he sum m ons i n t he C l ar i on- L edgeron J une 16, 23, and 30. ¶10. B as ed on t he fac t s i n t he r ecor d, t he l i s t bel ow pr ovi des t he dat es and det ai l s of t he

a c tio n s M c C a f

f re yto o k in h e r d ili g e n t atte m p ts to se rv e B e n n e tt: M a r c h 1 1 , 2 0 0 3 Sher i ff’ s O ffi cer W alt er R am s ey at t empt ed t o s er ve B enn et tatt he addr es s B ennettgave a tt he t i m e of the acc i dent , how ever , he r epor t ed thatt he pro cess w as “U nexec ut ed - Subj ecthas m oved - i ncorr ects t r eet # 3 /1 1 /2 0 0 3 .” N o S p e c i f

i c D a t e s G i v e n M cC aff r ey cont i nue d t o s ear ch for B ennet t ’ s cor r ect addr es s us i ng the p hone book, i nt ernet , and the U ni t ed St at es PostO ffi ce. J u n e 1 1 , 2 0 0 3 R ebec ca G
. Ta y l o r ( a t t o r n e y f o r M c Ca f

f r e y ) s i gned and

### 8 f i l e d a s w o r n a f

f i d a v i ts t a t i n g t h a ta f

t e r d i l i g e n ti n q u i r y, B e n n e tt c o u ld n o t b e f

o u n d
. J u n e 2 4 , 2 0 0 3 M cC aff r ey i s s ued a s ubpoena on t h e Com m i s s i oner of In su ra n c e in a n e f

f o rt to se rv e B e n n e tt’s in su re r to o b tain i nfor m at i on on hi s w her eabout s . O n J une 25, 2003, t he C o m m iss io n e r o f

In su ra n c e f

o rw a rd e d th e su b p o e n a to B en n ett ’s i n su rer. J une 16, 23, 30, 2003 M cC aff r eyat t empt ed t o s er ve B ennettbypubl i cat i on. N o S p e c i f

i c D a t e G i v e n D ef en d an t , U SF& G I ns ur ance C om pany i nfor m ed M c C a f f re yth a t th e ir so u rc e s h a d lo c a ted B e n n e tt. Oct o b e r 7 , 2 0 0 3 B as ed on i nfor m at i o n p rov ided b y U S F & G , M cC aff r ey fi l ed a s econd mot i on for addi t i onal t i m e ( 60 day s ) t o s er ve s um m ons , and the ci r cui tcour tgr ant ed the mot i on. Oc t o b e r 2 2 , 2 0 0 3 B e n n e t t w a s p e r s o n a l l y s e r v e d in H a rr is o n C o u n t y, M iss iss ip p i. ¶11. T hes e fact s pr es ents ubs t ant i al evi dence t hatM cC aff r eydi l i gent l yat t empt ed t o s er ve B e n n e tt u sin g a ll th e to o ls a t h e r d isp o sa l. A lso , o n c e p ro v id e d p e rtin e n t in f o rm a tio n a s to Be n n e t t ’ s wh e r e a b o u t s b yh e ri n s u r a n c e c o mp a n y , M c Ca f f r e y s o u g h t t o s e c u r e a d d i t i o n a l t i me t o s e r v e Be n n e t t
. Th e r e f o r e , g o o d c a u s e e x i s t e d f o r wh y p r o c e s s wa s n o ts e r v e d wi t h i n t h e t i me p e rio d a llo w e d b yR u le 4 (h ) a n d th e in iti a l ex ten sio n p ro v id e d b y the c irc u it co u rt. A ccor di ngl y , t he ci r cui tcour tdi d not abus e i t s di s cr et i on by gr ant i ng M cC aff r ey t he i ni t i al 60 d a ye x te n s io n a n d d e n y in g B e n n e tt’ s M o tio n to D is m is s .

II. W h eth er th e C ircu it C o u rt err ed in d en y ing B en n ett’s m ot i on t o di s m i s s becau se M cC af f rey di d not d em o n stra te e x cu sa b le n eg lect u n d er R u le 6 (b )(2) to a llo w fo r a d d itio n a l tim e to se r v e p r o c e ss , w h e r e sa id

### 9 r e que s t w as m ade ni ne t y- t w o ( 92 ) days af t e r t he e x p ir a ti o n o f t h e fi r s t t im e e x te n s io n . ¶ 1 2
. T h e c i r c u i t c o u r t e n l a r g e d t h e t i m e f o r M c C a f

f r e y t o s e r v e p r o c e s s f

r o m 1 2 0 t o 1 8 0 d a ys
w hen i tent er ed i t s fi r s tor deron A pr i l 29, 2003. T he 180 dayper i od expi r ed on J ul y6, 2003. B e n n e tt arg u e s th a t M c C a f f re yf a iled to tak e a n y a c tio n to g e t a d d iti o n a l tim e to se rv e B e n n e tt for92 day s t her eaf

t er . Subse quent l y , on O ct ober 7, 2003, M cC aff r eyfi l ed a mot i on t o ext end t he per i od t o eff

ectuat e pr oces s byan addi t i onal 60 day s . T he ci r cui tcour tgr ant ed thi s m ot i on, and B ennett w as per s onal l y s er ved on O ct ober 22, 2003. B ennettfur t herar gues t hatt he s econd

e x ten sio n w a s g ra n ted in v io latio n o f M .R .C .P . 6 (b )(2 ) bec ause M cC affrey did n o t d e m o n stra te

a n ytyp e o f

e x c u s a b le n e g le c t. ¶13
. M i ssi ssi pp i R ule of C i vil P rocedu re ( 6)( b) st at es:

(b ) E n larg em en t. W h e n b y t h e s e ru l e s o r b y n o t i ce gi ven th e re u n d e r or b y o rd e r of th e c o u rt a n a c t is re q u ire d o r a llo w e d to b e d o n e a t o r wi t h i n a s p e c i f i e d t i me , t h e c o u r tf

o rc a u s e s h o wn m ayat a n y t i me , i n i t s d i s c r e t i o n ( 1 ) wi t h o r wi t h o u t mot i o n or no ti ce or dert he per i od enl ar ged i f r eques tt her efor e i s m ade befor e the expi r at i on of t h e p er i od or i gi nal l ypr es cr i bed oras ext ended bya pr evi ous or der , or ( 2) upon m ot i on m ade a ft ert he ex p ir ati o n o f th e sp ec ifi ed p eriod p erm it the ac t to b e d o n e w h ere fai l ur e t o actw as t he r es ul tof e x cu s abl e negl ect ; buti tm aynot ex tend the tim e f

o r t ak ing an yac tio n u n d er R u les 5 0 (b), 52 (b), 59( b) , 59( d) , 59( e) , and 60( b) , exce ptt o t he ext entand undert he condi t i ons t her ei n s t at ed. M iss. R
. C iv. P. 6(b ). ¶14. “‘ G ood caus e’ for del ay has been i nt erpr et ed as ‘ excus abl e negl ect ’ or adequa t e pr oof t hat t her e w as a need for t he del ay orot herj us t i fi cat i on of t he del ayw hi ch w oul d convi nce the

### 10

cour t s t o gr ant an ext ens i on i n t he s er vi ce of t he def endant ( s )
. ” Moor e ex. R el Moor e v. B oyd, 799 So. 2d 133, 136 ( M i s s . C t
. A pp. 2001) ( quot i ng B la c k v . Ca r e y Ca n a da , I

n c . 791 F. Supp. 1120, 1126- 27) ( S. D
. M i s s . 1990) )
. T hi s excus abl e negl ect s t andar d i s a ver ys t r i cts t andar d. I d . at136 ( quot i ng B la c k v . Ca r e y Ca n a da , I

n c . 7 9 1 F
. S u p p . 1 1 2 0 , 1 1 2 7 (S
. D
. M iss. 1 9 9 0 )). A cons ci ous and i nt ent i onal del ayof s er vi ce byt he pl ai nt i ff w i l l notcons t i tut e good ca us e for

a n e x te n s io n . I

d. ¶15. A s s t at ed pr evi ous l y , M cC aff r eyes t ab li sh ed g o o d ca u se fo r the de l ayi n s er vi ng B e n n e tt. T h e f

a c ts w h ich e sta b lis h e d g o o d c a u se f o r d e lay ha v e a lso e sta b lish e d e x c u sa b le negl ect
. M cC aff

r ey di d not cons ci ous l y or i nt ent i onal l y del ay s er vi ce, butus ed eve r ym eans pos s i bl e t o pl ace B ennetton not i ce of t he l aw s ui tpendi ng agai ns thi m . A l t hough herat t empt t o per for m s er vi ce by publ i cat i on w as defe ct i ve, i tpr ovi ded not i ce t o B ennettw i t hi n t he gi ven par amet er s of t he fi r s t60- dayt i m e ext ens i on s i n ce h is r es i dence w as unknow n. W hen M cC af fre y ’s i n su ran ce co m p an yh ir ed a p ri v ate in v e s ti g ator to a sce rt ain B en n ett ’s

w her eabout s and M cC aff r eyw as i nfor m ed of Bennet t ’ s l ocat i on, s he ac t ed w i t h al l due d ili g e n c e b yse e k in g th e se c o n d tim e e x ten sio n in o rd e r to p e rso n a ll y s e rv e B e n n e tt. In th is

m anner , t he pr ocedur al defe ct i venes s of t he att empt ed s er vice b y publ i cat i on w as cur ed. A l t hough ni nety - t w o ( 92) day s el aps ed bet w een t he fi r s t ext ens i on and the s econd e xt ens i on
o f tim e , M c C a f

f re y ’s a c tio n s f

irm lye sta b lish e d g o o d c a u se f o r th e d e lay in se rv ice , an d it i s
c le a r t h a t s h e m e t th e s ta n d a rd f o r e x c u s a b le n e g le c t. ¶ 1 6
. U n d e r th e sp e c if ic f a c ts o f th is c a se , w e f

in d th a t th e c irc u it co u rt d id n o t ab u se its

### 11

di s cr et i on i n gr ant i ng M cC aff r ey ’s s econd mot i on foran addi t i onal s i xt yday s t o s er vi ce p r o c e s s b e c a u s e M c C a f f r e y e s t a b l i s h e d g o o d c a u s e a n d e x c u s a b l e n e g l e c t f o r t h e d e l a y. T h e re f o re , w e a f

f irm th e d e c isio n o f

th e c irc u it co u rt. CO NC L US I ON ¶ 1 7
. Fo r t h e r e a s o n s s t a t e d a b o v e , we a f f i r m th e j u d g me n t o f t h e Ci r c u i t Cou r t of H i nds C ount yand r emand t hi s cas e forfur t herpr ocee di ngs cons i s t entw i t h thi s opi ni on. ¶ 1 8
. AF F I RM ED AND RE M ANDE D. S M I TH, C. J . , W AL LE R AND CO BB, P . J J . , DI AZ , EA S LE Y, CARL S ON AND DI CK I NS ON , J J . , CO NC UR . RA ND OL P H, J . , NO T P AR T I CI P AT I NG .