Tex. R. Civ. P. 103

TEXAS RULES
Copyright © 2004 by
Matthew Bender & Company, Inc.
a member of the LexisNexis Group.
All rights reserved.

*** THIS DOCUMENT IS CURRENT THROUGH NOVEMBER 30, 2004 ***
*** December 2004 Annotation Service ***

STATE RULES  
TEXAS RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE  
PART II. RULES OF PRACTICE IN DISTRICT AND COUNTY COURTS  
SECTION 5. Citation

Tex. R. Civ. P. 103  (2004)

 Review Court Orders which may amend this Rule

Rule 103 Who May Serve.


   Citation and other notices may be served anywhere by (1) any sheriff or constable or other person authorized by law or, (2) by any person authorized by law or by written order of the court who is not less than eighteen years of age. No person who is a party to or interested in the outcome of a suit shall serve any process. Service by registered or certified mail and citation by publication shall, if requested, be made by the clerk of the court in which the case is pending. The order authorizing a person to serve process may be made without written motion and no fee shall be imposed for issuance of such order.


 
CASE NOTES
   Civil Procedure > Pleading & Practice > Service of Process > Methods of Service
   Civil Procedure > Dismissal of Actions > Involuntary Dismissal
   Civil Procedure > Trials > Judicial Discretion
   Evidence > Procedural Considerations > Objections & Offers of Proof
   Evidence > Procedural Considerations > Rulings on Evidence
 
 
 

   Civil Procedure > Pleading & Practice > Service of Process > Methods of Service
 
1. Plaintiff's attempts to serve a corporation by certified mail were ineffective because (1) he was a party to the action, and thus not authorized to serve the documents under Tex. R. Civ. P. 103; (2) the persons who received the certified letters were not the corporation's registered agents, as required by Tex. R. Civ. P. 106(a)(2) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(h)(1); and (3) service by certified mail was improper under Fed. R. Civ. P. 4 because the corporation had not waived service. Jackson v. Atrium Cos., 2004 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 15486 (N.D. Tex. Aug. 9 2004).
 
2. Where pro se party's legal malpractice action was on the trial court's docket for 13 months and there was no indication in the record that the party, who was incarcerated, had contacted the clerk's office with instructions on serving and citing the attorney who was being sued pursuant to Tex. R. Civ. P. 103 and 106, the trial court found that the party had not diligently prosecuted his lawsuit, thus dismissal under Tex. R. Civ. P. 165a(1) was proper; further, there was no showing that the party sought reinstatement under Rule 165a(3), which might have provided evidence that he acted diligently in pursuing the case. Allen v. Rushing, 129 S.W.3d 226, 2004 Tex. App. LEXIS 1573 (Tex. App. Texarkana 2004).
 
3. Where pro se party's legal malpractice action was on the trial court's docket for 13 months and there was no indication in the record that the party, who was incarcerated, had contacted the clerk's office with instructions on serving and citing the attorney who was being sued pursuant to Tex. R. Civ. P. 103 and 106, the trial court found that the party had not diligently prosecuted his lawsuit, thus dismissal under Tex. R. Civ. P. 165a(1) was proper; further, there was no showing that the party sought reinstatement under Rule 165a(3), which might have provided evidence that he acted diligently in pursuing the case. Allen v. Rushing, 129 S.W.3d 226, 2004 Tex. App. LEXIS 1573 (Tex. App. Texarkana 2004).
 
4. Where pro se party's legal malpractice action was on the trial court's docket for 13 months and there was no indication in the record that the party, who was incarcerated, had contacted the clerk's office with instructions on serving and citing the attorney who was being sued pursuant to Tex. R. Civ. P. 103 and 106, the trial court found that the party had not diligently prosecuted his lawsuit, thus dismissal under Tex. R. Civ. P. 165a(1) was proper; further, there was no showing that the party sought reinstatement under Rule 165a(3), which might have provided evidence that he acted diligently in pursuing the case. Allen v. Rushing, 129 S.W.3d 226, 2004 Tex. App. LEXIS 1573 (Tex. App. Texarkana 2004).
 

   Civil Procedure > Dismissal of Actions > Involuntary Dismissal
 
5. Where pro se party's legal malpractice action was on the trial court's docket for 13 months and there was no indication in the record that the party, who was incarcerated, had contacted the clerk's office with instructions on serving and citing the attorney who was being sued pursuant to Tex. R. Civ. P. 103 and 106, the trial court found that the party had not diligently prosecuted his lawsuit, thus dismissal under Tex. R. Civ. P. 165a(1) was proper; further, there was no showing that the party sought reinstatement under Rule 165a(3), which might have provided evidence that he acted diligently in pursuing the case. Allen v. Rushing, 129 S.W.3d 226, 2004 Tex. App. LEXIS 1573 (Tex. App. Texarkana 2004).
 
6. Where pro se party's legal malpractice action was on the trial court's docket for 13 months and there was no indication in the record that the party, who was incarcerated, had contacted the clerk's office with instructions on serving and citing the attorney who was being sued pursuant to Tex. R. Civ. P. 103 and 106, the trial court found that the party had not diligently prosecuted his lawsuit, thus dismissal under Tex. R. Civ. P. 165a(1) was proper; further, there was no showing that the party sought reinstatement under Rule 165a(3), which might have provided evidence that he acted diligently in pursuing the case. Allen v. Rushing, 129 S.W.3d 226, 2004 Tex. App. LEXIS 1573 (Tex. App. Texarkana 2004).
 
7. Where pro se party's legal malpractice action was on the trial court's docket for 13 months and there was no indication in the record that the party, who was incarcerated, had contacted the clerk's office with instructions on serving and citing the attorney who was being sued pursuant to Tex. R. Civ. P. 103 and 106, the trial court found that the party had not diligently prosecuted his lawsuit, thus dismissal under Tex. R. Civ. P. 165a(1) was proper; further, there was no showing that the party sought reinstatement under Rule 165a(3), which might have provided evidence that he acted diligently in pursuing the case. Allen v. Rushing, 129 S.W.3d 226, 2004 Tex. App. LEXIS 1573 (Tex. App. Texarkana 2004).
 

   Civil Procedure > Trials > Judicial Discretion
 
8. Where the trial court limited the parties' time to present their case to one hour a piece, counsel for the assisted living facility and the owner stated at the beginning of the trial that she did not believe the case could be presented in that amount of time, but at no point in the trial did the facility or the owner make an offer of proof concerning evidence excluded because of time constraints as required by Tex. R. Evid. 103(a)(2); thus, there was nothing for the appellate court to review. Health Enrichment & Longevity Inst., Inc. v. State, 2004 Tex. App. LEXIS 6246 (Tex. App. Austin July 15 2004).
 

   Evidence > Procedural Considerations > Objections & Offers of Proof
 
9. Where the trial court limited the parties' time to present their case to one hour a piece, counsel for the assisted living facility and the owner stated at the beginning of the trial that she did not believe the case could be presented in that amount of time, but at no point in the trial did the facility or the owner make an offer of proof concerning evidence excluded because of time constraints as required by Tex. R. Evid. 103(a)(2); thus, there was nothing for the appellate court to review. Health Enrichment & Longevity Inst., Inc. v. State, 2004 Tex. App. LEXIS 6246 (Tex. App. Austin July 15 2004).
 

   Evidence > Procedural Considerations > Rulings on Evidence
 
10. By not objecting to certain evidence when it came into evidence in connection with defendant's trial for aggravated sexual assault, defendant forfeited defendant's complaint pursuant to Tex. R. App. P. 33.1(a), Tex. R. Evid. 103(a)(1). Jefferson v. State, 2004 Tex. App. LEXIS 9082 (Tex. App. Waco Oct. 13 2004).