X

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.
Click here for the full text of this decision FACTS:The evidence at the trial of this bill of review showed that a certificate of service from the secretary of state was on file ten days before the underlying default judgment was granted, but citation and return were not. Relying on its opinion in G.F.S. Ventures Inc. v. Harris, 934 S.W.2d 813 (Tex. App. Houston [1st Dist.] 1996, no writ), the 1st Court of Appeals held this was sufficient. Petitioner points out that this opinion conflicts with the 6th Court of Appeals’ opinion to the contrary in Onyx TV v. TV Strategy Group LLC, 990 S.W.2d 427 (Tex. App. � Texarkana 1999, no pet.). HOLDING:Affirmed. Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 107 prohibits a default judgment until citation and proof of service have been on file for 10 days. In Whitney v. L & L Realty Corp., 500 S.W.2d 94 (Tex. 1973), the court reversed a default judgment because the record included proof of service on the secretary of state, but not a certificate that the secretary had forwarded process to the defendant. There was such a certificate in Capitol Brick Inc. v. Fleming Mfg. Co., 722 S.W.2d 399 (Tex. 1986), so the court held that “[a]bsent fraud or mistake, the Secretary of State’s certificate is conclusive evidence that the Secretary of State, as agent of [the defendant], received service of process for [the defendant] and forwarded the service as required by the statute.” The 1st Court of Appeals interpreted Capitol Brick to dispense with any requirement that the default judgment record include the citation and return. The court agrees with the 1st Court. When substituted service on a statutory agent is allowed, the designee is not an agent for serving but for receiving process on the defendant’s behalf. A certificate like the one here from the secretary of state conclusively establishes that process was served. As the purpose of Rule 107 is to establish whether there has been proper citation and service, the secretary’s certificate fulfills that purpose. The court recognizes that service of a defective citation through substituted service on the secretary of state could mislead a defendant and lead to an improper default judgment. In such cases, a defendant may bring a bill of review and establish those facts. Caldwell v. Barnes, 975 S.W.2d 535 (Tex. 1998). But Campus was not misled here because � as it had failed to update addresses for its registered agent and registered office � it never received anything the secretary sent. Accordingly, Campus Investments Inc. was negligent in failing to comply with its statutory duties. The court holds there is some evidence to support the trial court’s denial of the bill of review. Wembley Inv. Co. v. Herrera, 11 S.W.3d 924 (Tex. 1999) (per curiam). OPINION:Per curiam.

Want to continue reading?
Become a Free ALM Digital Reader.

Benefits of a Digital Membership:

  • Free access to 3 articles* every 30 days
  • Access to the entire ALM network of websites
  • Unlimited access to the ALM suite of newsletters
  • Build custom alerts on any search topic of your choosing
  • Search by a wide range of topics

*May exclude premium content
Already have an account?

 
 

ALM Legal Publication Newsletters

Sign Up Today and Never Miss Another Story.

As part of your digital membership, you can sign up for an unlimited number of a wide range of complimentary newsletters. Visit your My Account page to make your selections. Get the timely legal news and critical analysis you cannot afford to miss. Tailored just for you. In your inbox. Every day.

Copyright © 2020 ALM Media Properties, LLC. All Rights Reserved.