Skip to main content
INTERNAL PROTOTYPE — NOT LEGAL ADVICE — DO NOT SEND

Clark v. Bridges, 75 A.3d 149 (2013)

Citation
Clark v. Bridges, 75 A.3d 149 (2013)
Parent Document
Clark v. Bridges, 75 A.3d 149 (2013)
Jurisdiction
DC (municipal)
Effective Date
2013-08-22

Full Text

855 chars
The change to Superior Court Civil Rule 77(d), with its reference to the permissive Superior Court Civil Rule 5(b), was apparently motivated by changes to corresponding provisions of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.3 The Federal Rules were modified to accommodate the increasing acceptance of electronic service as an alternative to mailing. See Fed.R.Civ.P. 77 (Advisory Committee Notes, 2001 Amendments) (noting that due to changes in “Rule 5(b)” and “the success of ... experiments” done by courts with electronic service, Rule 77 would also be changed). Accordingly, we are left with the inescapable conclusion that Superior Court Civil Rule 77(d) no longer can be read as requiring the clerk to serve the parties by mail. To the contrary, the clerk is now empowered to serve the parties in any manner permitted by Superior Court Civil Rule 5(b).