FI FTH DI VI SI ON

PHI PPS, P. J.

, DI LLA RD and PETERSON, JJ.

N O T IC E : M otions for r e c ons i de r a tion m us t be

ph y sic a l ly r e ce iv ed i n our c le r k ’s offic e w ithin te n

da y s of the da te of de c is ion to be de e m ed tim e ly file d.

http://w w w .ga a ppe a l s .us /r ule s

M ay 2, 2016



# I n th e Co u r t o f

A p p eals o f

G eo r g ia

A1 6 A0 36 9 . SPACE COAST CREDIT UNION v . GROCE. PE-0 1 5

P E T E R S O N , J u d g e.

Sp ace Co as t Cred it Un i o n (“ Sp ace Co as t ”) fi led a l aws u i t ag ai n s t Ro b ert St ev e

Gro ce t o rei n s t at e a fi rs t p ri o ri t y d eed t o s ecu re d e b t

. Wh en Gro ce d i d n o t fi l e an

an s wer, Sp ace Co as t m o v ed fo r s u m m ary ju d g m en t

. T he t ri al co u rt d en ied t h e m o t i o n,

ru l i n g t h at Gro ce h ad n o t b een s erv ed p ro p erl y

. Sp ace Co as t b ro u g h t t h i s

i n t erl o cu t o ry ap p eal

, arg u i n g th at t h e tri al c o u r t h a d erred i n co ncl u d in g t h at (1 )

Gro ce was m en t al ly i m

pai red an d u n ab l e t o accep t serv i ce wh en i t was at t em p t ed an d

(2 ) a p ro ces s s erv er i s req ui red t o i n t eract an d s p eak wi t h a d efen d an t at t h e t i m e o f

s erv i ce. Becau se t h e t ri al co u rt d i d n o t ab u s e i ts di s cret i on i n fi n d i n g th at s erv i ce was

n o t p ro p er wh en t h e pro ces s s erv er m erel y l eft t h e p ap ers at Gro ce’ s bed s i de as h e l ay

s em i -co n s ci o u s (at b es t ), we affi rm

.Gro c e fai l ed t o fi l e a res p o n s i v e b ri ef, an d s o h e i s d eem ed t o ad m i t t h e

s t at em en t o f fact s as s et ou t b y Sp ace Co as t t o t h e ex t en t s u p po rt ed b y t he reco rd

. See

Gr een v. W

a d dl et o n

, 28 8 Ga. Ap p

. 3 6 9

, 3 6 9 n .1 (6 5 4 SE2 d 2 0 4) (2 0 0 7 ). So v i ewed

,

Gro ce refi n an ced t h e fi rs t p ri o ri t y l oan s ecu red by h i s h o m e w i t h t he s am e l en d er t h at

h e h ad p rev i ou s l y u s ed

, Eas t ern Fi n an ci al Fl o ri d a Cred i t U n i o n (“ EFFCU”). Sh o rt l y

aft er t h e cl o s in g

, E FFCU erro n eo u s l y ex ecu t ed an d fi l ed a can cel l at io n o f t h e fi rs t

p ri o ri t y deed

, ev en t h o u gh t h e d eed h ad n o t b een s at i s f i e d i n f u l l

. Years l at er,

EFFCU’ s s u cces s o r co m

p an y

, Sp ace Co as t

, fi l ed t h i s l aws u i t

, s eek i n g t o rei n s t at e t h e

d eed

.

A week aft er t h e co m p l ai n t was fi l ed

, a p ro ces s serv er at t em p t ed t o s erv e Gro ce

at t h e p ro p ert y t h at s ecu red t h e l o an

. Th e p ro ces s s erv er av erred t h at h e s p o k e t o a

wo m an t h ere wh o cl ai m ed t o b e Gro ce’ s d au g ht er. Sh e sai d t h at h er fat h er di d n o t l i v e

t h ere b u t wo u l d n o t s h are h i s wh ereab o u t s

. A li tt l e m o re t h an a w eek lat er, t h e s am e

p ro ces s serv er at t em

p t ed t o s erv e Gro ce at a n earb y nu rs i n g h o m e. In hi s affi d av i t

, t h e

p ro ces s s erv er s ai d t h at Gro ce, wh o ap p eared t o b e i n h i s l at e 6 0s or earl y 7 0 s

, “ was

s l eep i n g i n hi s bed an d i n an d o ut o f co n s ci o u s n es s ” an d was “ un ab l e t o t ak e t h e

p ap ers .” Th e p ro ces s s erv er s ai d t h at h e p u t t h e p ap ers o n a t ab l e n ex t t o t he b ed

.

2Gro ce fi led n o an s wer t o t h e s u i t

, an d Sp ace Co as t fi l ed an u no p po s ed m o t i o n

fo r s u m m ary ju d g m en t

, arg u i n g t h at b ecau se t h e u nd erl y i n g in deb t ed n es s o n t h e l o an

h ad n o t b een sat is fi ed

, t h e can cel l at i o n d id n o t re-co n v ey ti tl e t o G ro ce. Sp ace Co as t

s o ug h t a d ecl arat o ry ju d g m en t t h at t h e deed rem ai n s th e fi rs t p ri ori t y d eed an d t h a t

t h e can cel l at i o n was n u l l an d v o i d

. Hav i n g t ak en tes t im on y fro m t h e p ro ces s s erv er

a t a h eari n g

, 1 t h e t ri al co u rt d en i ed t h e s u m m ary j u d gm en t m o ti o n o n t h e b a s i s t h a t

Gro ce was n o t pro p erl y s erv ed an d t herefo re t h e co u rt l a c ked p ers on al j u ri s d i ct i o n

o v er h i m

. Fi n di n g t hat t h e affi d av i t o f s erv i ce p ro v i d ed ev id en ce t h at Gro ce was

“ m en t al l y i m

p ai red ” at t h e t i m e o f s erv i ce an d t h e p ro ces s s erv er’ s l iv e t es t i m o n y at

t h e h eari n g w as i n s u ffi ci en t t o o v erco m e t h i s ev id en ce, t h e t r ial co u rt fo u n d t h at

Gro ce was i n cap ab le o f accep ti n g t h e s erv i ce d o cu m en ts w h en t hey w ere l eft at h i s

b ed si d e. Th e t ri al co u rt fo u nd t h at t h e p ro ces s s erv er “ was aware o f t h e Defen d an t ’ s

c o n d i t i o n ” an d “ co u ld n o t h av e reas o n ab l y bel i ev ed t h at th e Defen d an t w as aware

s erv i ce was b ei ng at t em pt ed .” Th e t ri al co u rt i s s ued a cert i fi cat e fo r i m m ed i at e

rev i ew, an d we g ran t ed Sp ace Co as t’ s ap p l i cat i o n fo r i n t erl ocu t o ry ap p eal

.

1 Th e reco rd i n d i cat es th at t h i s h eari n g was h el d as p art o f a “ n o s erv i ce”

cal en d ar p ri o r t o t h e fi l i ng o f t h e m o t i on fo r s u m m ary j u d g m en t. Ho wev er, t h e

h eari n g was no t t ran scri b ed an d t h e t ri al co u rt d i d n o t i ss u e a wri t t en o rd er o n t h e

i s su es rai s ed b y

t h e at t em p ted s erv i ce u n t i l aft er t h at m o t i on was fi l ed

.

3“ Ab s en t a s h o wi n g o f an ab u s e o f d is cret i o n, a t r i a l co u rt ’ s fi n d i n g o f

i n s u ffi ci en t serv i ce o f p ro ces s m u s t b e affi rm ed .” F

r a n ch el l v. Cl a rk , 2 41 Ga. Ap p.

1 2 8

, 1 3 1 (3 ) (5 2 4 SE2 d 5 1 2 ) (1 99 9 ). “ Th e t ri al co u rt as fact fi n d er m u s t d eci d e

wh et h er t h e ev id en ce o v erco m es t h e fact s refl ect ed i n a ret u rn o f s erv i ce, an d we wi l l

u p h o l d t h at fi n di n g i f i t i s s u p po rt ed by an y ev id en ce.” Ho l mes & Co

. o f Or l a n d o v.

Ca r l is l e , 2 8 9 Ga. Ap p . 6 1 9 , 6 2 0 (1 ) (6 5 8 SE2 d 1 8 5 ) (2 0 0 8 ).

1

. Sp ace Co as t arg ues t h at t h e t ri al co u rt erred b y fi nd i ng t h at Gro ce w a s

m en t al l y i m

p ai red at t h e t i m e o f s erv i ce. It i s d i ffi cu l t t o ev al u at e t hi s fact u al fi n d i n g,

b ecau s e n o t ran s cri p t was m ad e o f t he heari n g

. Mo reo v er, i t i s u n cl ear ex act l y wh at

ro l e t h is fi n d i n g p l ay ed i n t h e t ri al co u rt ’ s an al y s i s

. Th e t ri al co u rt referen ced OCGA

§ 9 -1 1 -4 (e)(4 ), wh i ch p ro v i d es t h at a p ers o n “ w ho h as b een ju d i ci al l y d ecl ared t o b e

o f u n s ou n d m i n d or i n cap ab l e o f co n d u ct in g h i s o r h er o w n affai r s an d fo r wh o m a

g u ard i an h as b een ap p oi nt ed ” m u s t b e s erv ed v i a t h ei r g u ard i an o r g u ard i an ad l i t em

.

Bu t t h e t ri al co urt al so reco g n i zed t h at t h ere i s n o ev i d en ce i n t hi s cas e t h at Gro ce h as

b een d e c l a r e d l eg al l y in co m p et en t

, an d t h e co u rt di d no t s ay ex pl i ci t l y t h at t h e

p ro ced ure o u t l in ed i n OCGA § 9 -1 1 -4 (e)(4 ) m u s t b e fo l l o wed h ere.

If t h e tri al co u rt d i d m eas u re Sp ace Co as t ’ s s erv i ce at t em p t s ag ai n st t h e ru l e o f

OCGA § 9 -1 1-4 (e)(4 ), t h e t ri al co u rt erred

. Un l es s an d u n t i l a co u rt d et erm i n es t h at

4a p ers o n i s ci v i l l y i n co m p et en t o r i n n eed o f a g u ard ian

, th e req u i rem en t s fo r s erv i n g

s o m eo n e wh o i s i n co m

p et en t d o n o t ap p l y an d an y l awfu l m ean s o f s e r v i c e wi l l

co n fer p ers o nal ju ri s di ct i o n o v er h im

. Tr a mmel v. B r ad b er ry

, 25 6 Ga. Ap p

. 4 1 2

, 4 1 5

(1 ) (5 6 8 SE2 d 7 1 5 ) (2 0 0 2) (p h y s i cal p reced en t o n l y ) (co n s tru i n g su b s t an t i al l y

i d en t i cal p ri o r v ers io n o f s t at u t o ry p ro v i s i o n ) ( ci t i n g S el l er s v. Bel l

, 1 51 Ga. Ap p.

4 4 0

, 4 4 1 (1 ) (2 6 0 SE2 d 5 38 ) (1 9 7 9 )). Th e t ri al co u rt h ere s o u g h t t o di s t i n g u i s h

S el l er s

– i n wh ich we fo u n d t h at p ers o n al s erv i ce was p ro p er wh en t h e d efen d an t was

n o t d ecl ared i nco m

p et en t un t i l aft er h e was s erv ed wi t h p ap ers — o n t h e b as i s t h at

i n t h at cas e t here was n o ev id e n c e t h at t h e p lai n t i ff was aware o f t h e d efen d an t ’ s

m en t al co n d it i on

. Ho wev er, an ex am i n at io n o f S el l er s rev eal s t h at t h e referen ce t o t h e

p l ai n t i ff’ s l ack o f k n owl ed g e i s m e r e l y d i ct a. See S el ler s

, 1 5 1 Ga. Ap p

. at 4 4 1 (1 )

(h o l d i n g s erv i ce s u ffi ci e n t b ecau s e “ n o s u ch [ju d i ci al ] d et erm i n at i o n [o f

i n co m pet en cy ] h ad been m ad e o f t h e d efen d an t u n ti l s ev eral m o n t h s aft er t h e p l ai n t i ff

h ad s erv ed t h e d efen d an t wi t h h er co m pl ai n t an d s u m

m o n s ”). Th e s t at u t e co nt ai n s n o

ex cep t i o n t o i t s co n d i ti o n p reced en t o f a ju di ci al d et erm i n at i o n o f i n co m p et en ce.

S el l er s p ro v id es n o au t h ori ty

fo r i m p ly i ng an ex cep t i on b as ed o n a p ro ces s s erv er’ s

s u b ject i ve k n o wl ed g e of a d efen d an t ’ s m en tal co n d i t i o n

. W e d ecl in e to im p l y s u c h

an ex cep t i o n o u rs el v es

. Th e q u es t i o n fo r u s

, t h en

, i s wh et h er i t was an ab u s e o f

5d i s cret i o n t o fi nd t h at Sp ace Co as t d i d n o t p ro perl y s erv e Gro ce u n der t he u s u al ru l es

fo r s erv i ce o f p ro ces s

.

2

. Sp ace Co a s t arg u es t h at t h e t ri al co u rt erred b y fi n d i n g t h at Gro ce was

“ i n cap ab l e o f accep t i n g t h e s erv i ce d o cu m en t s ” an d t h at t h e p ro ces s was i n ad eq u at e

b ecau s e t h e p ro ces s s erv er di d n o t s p eak t o o r o th erwi se i n t eract wi t h Gro ce t o al ert

h i m t o t h e fact t h at s erv i ce was b ei n g at t em p ted

. OCGA § 9-1 1 -4 (e)(7 ) p ro v i d es t h at

s erv i ce o n an i n d i vi d u al d efen d an t g en eral l y m ay b e m ad e b y “ d el i v eri n g a co p y o f

t h e s u m m o n s at t ach ed t o a co p y

o f t he co m

p l ai n t

. . . t o t h e d efen d an t pers o n al l y .”

W e h av e fo u n d n o Geo rg i a au th o ri t y

, an d Sp ace Co as t h as ci t e d n o n e, ad d res s i n g

d i rect l y w h et h er l ea v i n g p ap ers n ex t t o a p ers on wh o i s as l eep o r i s o t h erwi s e

u n awa r e o f t h e del i v ery am o u n t s t o “ del i v eri n g ” a su m m o n s “ p ers on al l y ” as t h o s e

t erm s are u s ed i n OCGA § 9 -1 1 -4 (e)(7 ).

A rev i ew o f rel ev an t cas e l aw an d t h e t ex t o f t h e s t at u t e as a wh o l e co n v i n ces

u s t h at t h e an s w er t o t h at q u es t i o n i s n o

. In o rd er fo r m erel y l eav i n g p ap ers wh ere t h e

d efen d an t l i v es o r wo rk s t o co n s t i t u t e v al i d s erv i ce u n d er O CGA § 9 -1 1 -4 (e), cert ai n

req u i rem en t s m

u s t b e m et

. Fo r val i d s erv i ce t o b e effect uat ed b y leav i n g p ap ers at t h e

d o o r o f a d efen d an t’ s h o m e, fo r i n s t an ce, t h e s u m in v ol v ed i n t h e cas e m us t b e l es s

t h an $ 2 0 0

, reas o n ab l e effo rt s to o b t ai n “ p ers o n al s erv i ce” m u st h av e b een m ad e fi rs t

,

6t h e p ap ers m u s t b e p l aced in a wat erp ro o f p ack et

, an d a co p y al s o m us t b e m ai l ed

. See

OCGA § 9 -1 1 -4 (e)(6 ). In o rd er t o s erv e an i n d i v i du al defen d an t b y d el i v eri n g t h e

p ap ers to t h e d efen d an t ’ s w o rk p l ace, t h ey can n ot be l eft wi t h ju st an y o ne, b u t o n l y

wi t h “ an ag en t au th o ri zed b y ap p o i n t m en t o r b y law t o r e c e i v e s erv i ce o f pro ces s .”

OCGA § 9 -1 1 -4 (e)(7 ); see a l s o Amer i b a n k v. Qu a t t l eb a u m

, 2 2 0 Ga. Ap p

. 3 4 5

, 3 4 6

(1 ) (4 6 9 SE2 d 46 2 ) (1 9 9 6 ) (d eb t o r n o t “ p ers on al l y s erv ed ” w h en dep u t y g av e p ap ers

t o a recep t i o n i s t an d d eb t o r fo u n d t h em on h i s des k ). Th es e sep arat e p ro v is io n s

, wi th

t h ei r ad di t i o n al s afeg u ard s

, su g g es t t h at s erv i n g a d efen d an t “ p ers on al l y ” m ean s

s o m et h in g m ore t h an m erel y leav i n g p ap ers i n t h e v ici n it y o f an u n aware d efen d an t

.

In Ca r r o l l v. Cel a n es e Co r p

. o f Amer ica

, 2 0 5 Ga. 4 9 3

, 49 3 (2 ) (5 4 SE2 d 2 2 1 )

(1 9 4 9), ci t ed b y Sp ace Co as t

, o u r Su p rem e Co u rt h el d t h at p ers o nal s erv ice wo u l d b e

v al i d if a d ep u ty s h eri ff h ad d ro p p ed t he p ap ers at t he d efen d an t’ s feet

. Ho wev er, t h at

ru l i n g w a s p rem i s ed o n t h e as s u m p t i o n t h at t h e d ep u t y an d d efen d an t h ad a

co n vers at i on an d th e d efen d an t h ad refu s ed t o t ak e t h e p ap ers

. Th e d efen d an t was

aware t h at serv i ce was b ei n g at t em p t ed an d t h u s was o n n o t i ce of t h e laws ui t ag ai n s t

h i m , an d t h e Co u rt s i m

p l y refu s ed t o reward t h e d efen dan t ’ s k no wi n g refu s al

. Id

.

T his c a se pr e s e nts a di fferen t s et o f ci rcu m s tan ces : an el d erl y

, d o zi ng d efen d an t

u n aware o f t h e p ro ces s s erv e r ’s e f fo rt s

, an d t h e d i s t i n ct i on h as co n s t i t u t i o n al

7i m

p l i cat i o n s . In o rd er t o co m p l y wi t h s t at e an d fed eral co n cep t s o f d u e p ro ces s , t h e

m et h o d o f s erv i ce m

u s t b e “ reas o n ab l y cal cu l at ed t o gi v e [a defen d an t ] act u al n o t i ce

o f t h e p ro ceed i n gs an d an op p o rt u n i ty t o b e heard .” Mel t o n v. Jo h n s o n

, 2 42 Ga. 4 0 0,

4 0 3 (2 49 SE2 d 82 ) (1 97 8) ( q u o t i n g Mi l l i ken v. Meyer

, 3 11 U .S. 4 5 7

, 4 63 (6 1 S. Ct

.

3 3 9

, 8 5 LEd 27 8 ) (1 9 4 0 )); s ee a l s o Ben t o n v. Mo d

er n Fi n a n ce & In v. Co

. , 2 4 4 Ga.

5 3 3

, 5 3 4 (2 6 1 SE2 d 3 5 9) (1 9 7 9 ) (m et h o d o f s erv ice m ay b e co ns t i t u ti o n al l y d efen d ed

o n g ro u n d i t i s “ reas o n ab l y cert ai n t o i n fo rm t ho s e affect ed o r, wh ere co n d i t i o n s d o

n o t reas o n ab l y p erm i t s u ch n o t i ce, t h at t h e fo rm ch o s en i s n o t s u b s t an t i al l y l es s l i k el y

t o b ri n g h o m e no t i ce t h an o t h er o f t h e feas i b le an d cu s t o m ary s ub s t i t ut es ”) ( q u o t i n g

Mu l la n e v. Cen t r a l H

a no ver B a n k & Tr u s t Co

. , 3 3 9 U.S. 3 0 6

, 3 1 5 (7 0 S. Ct

. 6 5 2

, 9 4

LEd 8 65 ) (1 9 4 9 ) (p u n ct u at io n o m i t ted ))

. O u r Su p rem e Co u rt prev i o u s l y d ecl ared

u n co ns t it u t i o n al as v io lat i v e o f d u e p ro ces s a s tat u t e t h at au th o ri zed s erv i ce b y m erel y

l eav i ng a co p y at th e defen d an t’ s m o s t n o t o ri o u s p l ace o f ab o d e. B en t o n

, 2 4 4 Ga. at

5 3 5

. T h e Co u rt bas ed it s d eci s i o n o n co n cern s t hat s uch a m ean s o f s erv i ce “ i s n ot

reas on ab l y cal cu l at ed t o ap pri s e [t h e d efen d an t ] o f t h e pen d en cy o f an act i o n ag ai n s t

h i m .” Id

. Th e Co u rt s u g g es t ed t h at

, wi t h t h at m et h od o f s erv i ce, th e p ap ers m ay n ot

reach t h e d efen d an t p ro m p t l y

, as h e m ay b e ab s en t fro m t h e ho m e fo r s om e p eri o d o f

8t i m e o r i n t he p ro ces s o f m o v i n g

, o r t h e p ap ers m ig h t be d es t ro y ed b y b ad weat h er o r

rem o v ed b y

s o m eo n e el s e. Id

.

Al t h ou g h t h e m od e o f serv i ce em p l o y ed i s d i fferen t , t h e co n cern is t he s am e.

Gro ce m i g h t n o t h av e n o t iced t h e p ap ers fo r s o m e p eri o d o f t im e, i f ev er. A n u rs e o r

h o u s ek eep er m i gh t h av e t hro w n t h e p ap ers away

. Mo reo v er, we m ay rev ers e t h e t ri al

co u rt ’ s d eci s i o n i n t h i s c a s e o n l y i f i t am o u n ted t o an ab u se o f d is cret i o n

. See

Fr a nch el l

, 2 41 Ga. Ap p

. at 13 1 (3 ). Al t h o u g h Sp ace Co as t m ay b e co rrect t h at t h ere

i s n o req u i rem en t t hat a p ro ces s s erv er al way s m u s t en g ag e i n d ial o g u e ab o ut s erv i ce

wi t h a d efen d an t an d en s u re t h at t he defen d an t u n d er s t a n d s an d ack n owl ed g es

s erv i ce, i t was n o t an ab u s e o f d i s cret i o n fo r t h e t ri al co u rt t o fi nd

, u n d er t h e fact s o f

t h i s c a s e

, t h a t so m e co m m u n i cat i o n w as req u i red t o en s u re t h at t h e (at b es t ) s em i

co n sci o u s d efen d an t h ad fai r n o t i ce o f t h e l aws u i t

.

Sp ace Co as t arg u es th at t h e t ri al c o u r t ’ s ru l i n g m ean s t hat s erv i ce o n Gro ce

m ay n o t b e p o s s i bl e, co n t en d in g t h at t h e o rd er m ean s t h at Sp ace Co as t wi l l n eed t o

p u rs u e a p ro b at e co urt ’ s d et erm i nat i o n as t o Gro ce’ s co m p e t e n cy an d

, i f h e i s

ad ju d i cat ed i n co m

p et en t

, s eek t h e ap p o i nt m en t o f a g u ard i an fo r h i m

. Ho wev er, we

d o n o t t h in k t h at t he ru l e ap pl i ed h ere n eces s ari ly wo ul d l eav e a pl ai n t i ff at t em p t i n g

t o s erv e a d efen d an t s u ch as Gro ce wi t h ou t o t h er o p t i o n s

. A p ro ces s s erv er

9en co un t eri n g an i n cap aci t at ed d efen d an t m ig h t at t em p t t o ro u s e t h e d efen d an t

, o r

s i m p l y ret u rn an o th er t i m e. Al tern at i v el y , t h e p ro ces s s erv er m i g h t l eav e p ap ers “ at

t h e d efen d an t ’ s d wel l i ng h o u se o r u s u al p l ace o f ab o d e wi t h s o m e p ers on o f s u i t ab l e

ag e an d d i s cret i o n th en res i di n g t h erei n .” OCGA § 9 -1 1 -4 (e)(7 ). An d

, i n an y ev en t

,

i f t h e cu rren t s t at u t e d o es n o t p ro v i d e p ract ical o p t i o n s fo r a p l ai n t i ff i n Sp ace Co as t ’ s

s h o es

, t h e p ro p er reci p i en t fo r s u ch a co m p l ai nt i s t h e Gen eral As s em b l y

. Un l i k e t h i s

Co u rt

, t h e Gen eral As s em b l y i s v es t ed wi t h au t h ori t y t o a m e n d t h e st at ut e. W e,

h o wev er, can o n l y

ap p l y i t

.

Ju d g men t a f f i r m ed . Ph i

p p s , P. J., a nd

Di l la r d , J., co n cu r

.

10