Capasso v. Buchanan, 49 Fla. L. Weekly D198 (Fla. 4th DCA Jan. 19, 2024):
The defendant argued that the first attempt to serve her was invalid because the process server failed to place on the summons that date and time of service, and also failed to provide the process server’s initials or signature as required by section 48.031(5) and Rule 1.070.
Defendant also challenged the second attempt at service because the process server served the summons that had previously been returned as served, but again failed to comply with the statutory requirements.
A defendant is entitled to an evidentiary hearing on a motion to quash service of process, if the motion and accompanying affidavit show that if proven by clear and convincing evidence, the plaintiff failed to effect service. The trial court should have conducted an evidentiary hearing and the court reversed for one to take place.