View Single Post
  #7 (permalink)  
Old 06-03-2017, 02:23 PM
trinton trinton is offline
Join Date: Feb 2016
Posts: 1,681
trinton has a little shameless behaviour in the past

Originally Posted by arabian View Post
I had my ex served at his place of employment (outside). There is absolutely nothing wrong with this. Process server would know that you don't enter the place of employment.

A process server knows where and when they can most effectively conduct the service.
If you tell them you don't wish to be served at work they must respect your privacy and not be out to embarrass you at work in front of your colleagues. Could you imagine we start serving our exes at restuarants while they are serving guests? Serving someone inside building or on parking lot isn't any different. It is both Private Property and their place of employment. Stay the hell out of it.

There is no doubt that the personal service of this motion for contempt during the Husband’s birthday party was an upsetting and embarrassing experience. There is no doubt that use of court proceedings to cause gratuitous distress is outside the “rules of warfare” and may be punished through costs. In this case, however, the only evidence that this was the intent of the wife is the fact that the parties have conducted this litigation bitterly, the fact that the Wife swore her affidavit some 5 days prior to the material being served and the fact that service was effected on an embarrassing occasion at his home. There is no other evidence to support the suggestion that this was done deliberately. Should an inference be drawn from this circumstantial evidence? I have concluded that it should not. The circumstances which generated the Wife’s motion had existed for some time and one can understand her desire to bring the issue to a conclusion. While she swore her affidavit on the 20th of November counsel then had to incorporate that affidavit into a record. The documents required personal service because they pertained to contempt. A professional process server was apparently retained. There is no evidence that any special instructions were given to the process server. There is evidence that the Husband had previously asked not to be served at work so his home was the natural place for service.
Reply With Quote