RELATIONAL, LLC v. Hodges
627 F.3d 668
| 7th Cir. | 2010Background
- Hodges personally guaranteed up to $750,000 of Laminate Kingdom, LLC’s debt to Relational, with service provision that service could be sent to his Florida address.
- Laminate filed for bankruptcy in 2007; Relational sued in the Northern District of Illinois to enforce the guaranty.
- Relational could not locate Hodges at his Florida home and later served him in the UK via a British process server to 20 Margaret Grove, Harborne, Birmingham.
- A return of service and two affidavits stated Hodges was served on May 10, 2007, at 4 p.m. identifying himself as Hodges; Hodges did not appear, and a default judgment for $750,000 was entered in August 2007.
- Relational sought enforcement of the judgment in a UK court; Hodges later challenged service in Illinois under Rule 60(b)(4) and moved to vacate the default judgment; a district court evidentiary hearing upheld the service and denied vacation, which was affirmed on appeal.
- Hodges argued the supplemental affidavit was defective and that he was not served; the court held the prima facie service evidence was sufficient and credibility determinations supported denial of vacatur.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether service on Hodges in the UK was valid. | Relational asserts valid personal service via UK server to Hodges. | Hodges contends he was not served. | Yes, service sufficient to support prima facie valid service. |
| Whether the Rule 60(b)(4) motion to vacate was properly denied. | Relational maintained service proof and credibility supported denial. | Hodges argued service invalid and motion should succeed. | District court did not abuse discretion; judgment not void. |
| Impact of the supplemental affidavit on service proof. | Supplemental affidavit unnecessary but not fatal to prima facie showing. | Uns sworn/uncertified supplement undermines service proof. | Even if defective, original return of service and affidavit sufficed to discharge prima facie burden. |
| Whether Hodges’ additional cross-examination rights affected credibility. | Cross-examination not required; credibility for district court to assess. | Lack of live testimony impaired his defense. | No reversible error; credibility determinations within the court’s discretion. |
Key Cases Cited
- O'Brien v. R.J. O'Brien & Assocs., Inc., 998 F.2d 1394 (7th Cir.1993) (prima facie service evidence and burden-shifting on service)
- Robinson Eng'g Co. Pension Plan & Trust v. George, 223 F.3d 445 (7th Cir.2000) (per se abuse if lack of jurisdiction or service; burden shifting)
- Homer v. Jones-Bey, 415 F.3d 748 (7th Cir.2005) (abuse of discretion standard for Rule 60(b)(4) denial; prima facie service)
- Van Harken v. City of Chicago, 103 F.3d 1346 (7th Cir.1997) (no absolute right of confrontation in civil cases; credibility assessed by court)
- Omni Capital Int'l., Ltd. v. Rudolf Wolff & Co., 484 U.S. 97 (1987) (judgment void where no service or jurisdiction; due process)
- United States v. Drogoul, 1 F.3d 1546 (11th Cir.1993) (foreign nationals and subpoena power limits; service considerations)