Favor Re: Validity Of C&D Via Email

[Dave Zan]

Hi guys,

I somewhat recall reading somewhere (either here or another forum) where a
Court found "valid" a C&D sent via email. I knew I should've bookmarked it on
the spot when I saw it, don't know why I didn't.

Highly appreciate it to anyone who recalls such and posts a link to it. Or even
if just a name so I can narrow down my search.

Thanks.

 

[jberryhill]

Dave you're confused again.

There is nothing "valid" or "invalid" about any way that I choose to communicate with you.

You are probably thinking not of a c&d letter, which I can send by pony express, smoke signals, carrier pigeon, or any other means, with service of process in a lawsuit. A court doesn't give a hoot whether or how someone sends you a letter. A court does care whether a lawsuit is properly served on a defendant.

There have been quite a few cases where service by email was deemed effective. How to effect service is up to the individual state or court involved. In service by email situations, typically the plaintiff will make a showing that other methods of service are impractical. On motion by the plaintiff, it is within the discretion of the court to deem any method of service to be proper, and email is a fairly common method.

http://www.internetcases.com/archives/service_of_process/index.html

 

[Dave Zan]

That's why I put "valid" in quotation marks, for lack of a better term. I guess I
should've used "sufficient". :-D

And don't fret, I understand they're treated case to case. Most legal disputes
are, anyway, if not all of them.

Thanks for the link, John. Take care there.

 

[jberryhill]

I guess I
should've used "sufficient".

Well that's my question... "sufficient" for what?

A court doesn't give a hoot whether anyone sent a c&d letter to anyone else, much less how it was sent.

You might as well ask whether a court would consider an electronic birthday card to be "valid" relative to a paper birthday card. It's just a piece of mail with no substantial legal significance.