Court Opinion

ID: 9674430
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-24 04:28:30.697755+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:16:27.560361
License: Public Domain

SNYDER, Judge,
dissenting.
I respectfully dissent. I am unable to agree that there was a disputed issue of material fact concerning the attempt to serve the Citizens Mutual Insurance Co. The return showed service on Ann Wills. The statute requires that service may be attained by delivering a copy of the summons and the petition to an officer, partner, a managing or general agent, “or by leaving the copies at any business office of the defendant with the person having charge thereof ...”
The uncontradicted affidavit filed by Citizens Mutual in support of its motion for a summary judgment stated that Ann Wills was an employee for clerical purposes and for no other purpose. The majority says that the affidavit failed to state that Mrs. Wills did not have charge of the office at the time of service. If she were an employee for no other purpose than clerical purposes, the phrase “no other purpose” plainly would include the purpose of having charge of the office.
If there were no valid service on Citizens Mutual, then the trial court had no jurisdiction over Citizens Mutual and Mrs. Ken-non’s attempted service by mailing a copy of her pleading to Citizens Mutual’s lawyer was ineffective.
I would affirm the trial court’s summary judgment in favor of Citizens Mutual Insurance Co.