Chronister v. Sam Tanksley Trucking, Inc., 4 Fed. R. Serv. 3d 1245 (N.D. Ill. 1983). · Go Syfert
Search
Chronister v. Sam Tanksley Trucking, Inc., 4 Fed. R. Serv. 3d 1245 (N.D. Ill. 1983). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
9 citation events across 6 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Harlan v. Pearson (ned, 1990-12-07)
Top citers, strongest first. 4 distinct citers. How cited ↗
cited Cited as authority (rule) Harlan v. Pearson
D. Neb. · 1990 · confidence medium
Temple v. Reese, 109 F.R.D. 1, 3 (D.Neb. 1985).
cited Cited "see" Audio Enterprises, Inc. v. B & W Loudspeakers of America, A Division of Equity International Inc.
7th Cir. · 1992 · signal: see · confidence high
See, Epstein v. Wilder, 596 F.Supp. 793, 797 (N.D.Ill.1984) and Chronister v. Sam Tanksley Trucking, Inc., 109 F.R.D. 1 (N.D.Ill.1983).
cited Cited "see" Audio Enterprises, Incorporated, an Illinois Corporation v. B & W Loudspeakers of America, a Division of Equity International Incorporated, a Canadian Corporation, (Two Cases) Audio Enterprises, Incorporated, an Illinois Corporation v. B & W Loudspeakers of America, a Division of Equity International Incorporated, a Canadian Corporation and James Goodman, an Individual
7th Cir. · 1992 · signal: see · confidence high
See, Epstein v. Wilder, 596 F.Supp. 793, 797 (N.D.Ill.1984) and Chronister v. Sam Tanksley Trucking, Inc., 109 F.R.D. 1 (N.D.Ill.1983).
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Quann v. Whitegate-Edgewater
D. Maryland · 1986 · signal: see, e.g. · confidence low
See, e.g., Chronister v. Sam Tanksley Trucking, Inc., 569 F.Supp. 464, 468-70 , reconsideration granted on other grounds, 109 F.R.D. 1 (N.D.Ill.1983) (certified mailing accompanied by a return of service postcard seemingly held insufficient to meet the two-copies-of-notice-and-acknowledgment requirement under Rule 4(c)(2)(C)(ii)).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Nora CHRONISTER
v.
SAM TANKSLEY TRUCKING, INC.
No. 83 C 332.
District Court, N.D. Illinois.
Dec 5, 1983.
4 Fed. R. Serv. 3d 1245
Aspen.
Cited by 1 opinion  |  Published

ORDER

ASPEN, District Judge.

Defendant’s motion to reconsider [569 F.Supp. 464] is granted. Fed.R.Civ.P. 4(e) provides that service upon a party who is not an inhabitant or found within the state may be made under the circumstances and in the manner prescribed in a statute or court rule of the state in which the district court sits. According to Ill.Rev.Stat. ch. 110 11 2-208 and U 2-209, parties outside the state may be personally served. Defendant must therefore be personally served, notwithstanding the provisions for service by mail contained in Fed.R.Civ.P. 4(c)(2)(C)(ii). Plaintiff will be given 45 days in which to properly serve defendant. If service is not effected, her case will be dismissed for want of prosecution. Status set for Friday, December 9, 1983, is stricken; status hearing is set for Friday, February 10,1984, at 10:00 a.m. It is so ordered.