Durukan America, LLC v. Rain Trading, Inc.
787 F.3d 1161
7th Cir.2015Background
- Durukan sued Rain Trading and its president Yavuz Canbulat for unpaid candy sales; process server filed affidavits stating personal service on Canbulat and on Rain Trading at the company’s registered address on April 2, 2013 at 4:05 p.m.
- Defendants did not answer; district court entered default judgment for Durukan and later issued a wage garnishment summons allegedly served on a different individual at the same address.
- Nearly a year later defendants moved to vacate the default under Rule 60(b)(4), submitting Canbulat’s affidavit denying service and stating he was working at AbbVie (25 miles away) at the claimed time.
- Defendants produced employment records describing Canbulat’s regular 8:00 a.m.–5:00 p.m. work schedule and an email about leave (though no direct day-specific payroll record for April 2 was produced).
- The district court denied the motion without an evidentiary hearing, calling Canbulat’s affidavit “self-serving” and finding the employment records did not rebut the process server’s affidavit.
- The Seventh Circuit held that the defendants’ sworn denial plus employment records sufficiently disputed service and required an evidentiary hearing; the denial of the Rule 60(b) motion was vacated and the case remanded.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Validity of service of process | Process server’s notarized affidavits are prima facie proof of valid service | Canbulat swears he was not served and was at work elsewhere at the time; employment records corroborate | Service disputed; prima facie presumption overcome; hearing required |
| Jurisdiction after default judgment | Default judgment stands because affidavits of service are uncontroverted | Judgment is void for lack of personal jurisdiction if service was not made | If service lacking, judgment void; must resolve factual dispute before denying relief |
| Admissibility/weight of defendant’s affidavit | Plaintiff: server’s affidavit controls; defendant’s is merely self-serving | Defendant: sworn denial from person of firsthand knowledge is probative and rebuts presumption | Court erred discounting affidavit as merely self-serving; credibility cannot be resolved without live hearing |
| Need for evidentiary hearing | Plaintiff: no hearing necessary; affidavit of service sufficient | Defendant: dueling affidavits create a factual dispute requiring a hearing to determine service | Hearing required to resolve conflicting testimony; district court abused discretion by skipping one |
Key Cases Cited
- O'Brien v. R.J. O'Brien & Assocs. Inc., 998 F.2d 1394 (7th Cir.) (process-server affidavit is prima facie evidence of valid service)
- Relational, LLC v. Hodges, 627 F.3d 668 (7th Cir.) (lack of personal jurisdiction renders default judgment void; more searching review applies)
- Homer v. Jones-Bey, 415 F.3d 748 (7th Cir.) (dueling affidavits about service create factual dispute requiring hearing)
- Robinson Eng’g Co. Pension Plan & Trust v. George, 223 F.3d 445 (7th Cir.) (conflicts between defendant’s and service affidavits necessitate factual hearing)
- Castillo v. United States, 34 F.3d 443 (7th Cir.) (credibility determinations cannot be resolved solely on conflicting affidavits)
- Old Republic Ins. Co. v. Pacific Fin. Servs., 301 F.3d 54 (2d Cir.) (defendant’s sworn denial of receipt rebuts presumption and mandates evidentiary hearing)
The Seventh Circuit VACATED the district court’s denial of the Rule 60(b) motion and REMANDED for an evidentiary hearing to resolve whether service occurred and whether the default judgment is void.