The Social Media Law Blog is a forum for lawyers, compliance personnel, human resources managers, and other professionals who are struggling with the legal implications of social media across a broad variety of topics. Working professionals and Bloomberg BNA editors may share ideas, raise issues, and network with colleagues to build a community of knowledge on this rapidly evolving topic. The ideas presented here are those of individuals, and Bloomberg BNA bears no responsibility for the appropriateness or accuracy of the communications between group members.
Monday, March 18, 2013
by Meg McEvoy
Are social media websites a good place to find defendants for service of process? Probably so. But is it permissible? That's a different matter. Courts and one state (so far) have considered allowing social media websites like Facebook to be used for substituted service of process, though the authenticity of user accounts remains a key issue.
Texas H.B. 1989, introduced Feb. 27 by Rep. Jeff Leach (R), would allow courts to approve substituted service via a social media website if the court finds that "defendant could reasonably be expected to receive actual notice" through the site.
Service via Facebook was approved March 7 when the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York held that the Federal Trade Commission was permitted to effect service of documents, not including the summons and complaint, on five India-based defendants through email and Facebook, FTC v. PCCare247 Inc., No. 1:12-cv-07189-PAE (S.D.N.Y. March 7, 2013).
In PCCare247, the FTC sought to serve documents on defendants who had already received notice of the suit via process that included filing with the Indian Central Authority for service, email, Federal Express, and through a process server. The court found that the FTC had established facts that showed the Facebook accounts were likely owned by the defendants. In addition, the court noted, "service by alternative means is all the more reasonable where, as here, the defendants demonstrably already have knowledge of the lawsuit."
Less than one year before, in Fortunato v. Chase Bank USA, No. 1:11-cv-06608-JFK (S.D.N.Y. June 7, 2012), the Southern District of New York denied a request to serve process on a third party defendant through Facebook because of concerns regarding the authenticity of accounts on the social networking website. In that case, the court found that the plaintiff had not established any facts that the Facebook account was actually owned and accessed by the defendant.
The Texas bill would address authenticity concerns by requiring a court to find that a social media account is regularly accessed by the defendant before allowing substituted service. The legislation is pending and was referred to committee March 5.
Copyright 2013, The Bureau of National Affairs, Inc.
You must Sign In or Register to post a comment.
Service of Process via Social Media Becoming a Reality?
Update in Federal Video Privacy Law Prompts Launch of “Netflix Social”
CISPA: Will Social Media Companies Come on Board?
Legislative Roundup