This case has been cited 3 times or more.
|
2009-12-04 |
PERALTA, J. |
||||
| The above Return of Summons does not show or indicate the actual exertion or any positive steps taken by the officer or process server in serving the summons personally to the defendant. As in Jose v. Boyon,[30] this Court ruled that: The Return of Summons shows no effort was actually exerted and no positive step taken by either the process server or petitioners to locate and serve the summons personally on respondents. At best, the Return merely states the alleged whereabouts of respondents without indicating that such information was verified from a person who had knowledge thereof. Certainly, without specifying the details of the attendant circumstances or of the efforts exerted to serve the summons, a general statement that such efforts were made will not suffice for purposes of complying with the rules of substituted service of summons. | |||||
|
2009-10-02 |
DEL CASTILLO, J. |
||||
| Jurisprudence has long established that for substituted service of summons to be valid, the following must be demonstrated: (a) that personal service of summons within a reasonable time was impossible; (b) that efforts were exerted to locate the party; and (c) that the summons was served upon a person of sufficient age and discretion residing at the party's residence or upon a competent person in charge of the party's office or regular place of business.[30] It is likewise required that the pertinent facts proving these circumstances be stated in the proof of service or in the officer's return.[31] | |||||
|
2006-09-15 |
YNARES-SANTIAGO, J. |
||||
| In the case of Jose v. Boyon,[28] we observed:In the instant case, it appears that the process server hastily and capriciously resorted to substituted service of summons without actually exerting any genuine effort to locate respondents. A review of the records reveals that the only effort he exerted was to go to No. 32 Ariza Drive, Camella Homes, Alabang on July 22, 1998, to try to serve the summons personally on respondents. While the Return of Summons states that efforts to do so were ineffectual and unavailing because Helen Boyon was in the United States and Romeo Boyon was in Bicol, it did not mention exactly what efforts " if any " were undertaken to find respondents. Furthermore, it did not specify where or from whom the process server obtained the information on their whereabouts. x x x | |||||