Defendant appealed the magistrate judge's ruling that allowed service by email to India after the plaintiff has been unable to serve under the Hague Convention. Defendant argued, inter alia, that because India's objection to service by mail includes service by email.
The district court rejected the argument. While the courts are split on this issue, the court found a "strong majority of courts" have held that email is not transmission through "postal channels" as provided for in the Hague Convention.
We are back for the new year! Here is a nice, straightforward service issue to kick off the new season. This appears to be a straightforward and correct decision as emails are plainly not sent through postal channels as stated in the Hague Convention.
Post a Comment