Opinion ID: 1320396
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: the procedural jurisdictional questions: were the service requirements met?

Text: The complaints and summonses were mailed to all three defendants on June 17, 1977, and the district court clerk executed an affidavit stating that the copies were mailed by certified mail marked restricted delivery requesting a return receipt signed by the addressee only with postage prepaid. The letters were returned, marked addressee unknown. Complaints and summonses were thereupon forwarded to the Sheriff's Department of Boulder County, Colorado. The Affidavit of Service on the back of the summons to Neal Ford recites that on August 10, 1977, an officer personally served the Fords with copies of the summonses and complaints and that service upon the corporate defendant was also made by serving Neal Ford with a copy of the summons and complaint. On October 27, 1977, plaintiff's attorney filed with the district court an affidavit stating that the Fords had been personally served with the summonses and copies of the complaint and that no answer or motion or notice for appearance had been filed in said action and the time for answering had expired. Also, on that date, plaintiff's attorney filed with the district court an affidavit stating that he had made an investigation and determined that neither of the Fords were in the military service of the United States. A motion for default judgment accompanied the affidavits. On the same day, the judge set a hearing on the motion for 3:00 p.m. on November 11, 1977. Copies of the order setting the hearing were mailed to the defendants. On the morning of the day set for the hearing, Neal Ford called the court and asked for a postponement indicating that he wished to attend the hearing. The judge reset the hearing. The defendants did not appear and a default judgment was entered. Later, the Fords moved the court to set aside its judgment, which it did.