Legal Opinion · Dissent
McDonald v. United States
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Decided April 18, 1990No. 89-4510Published
1DissentGarza, Circuit Judge
I respectfully dissent.
There is no question that Peggy McDonald failed to serve the United States Attorney personally within the 120 day period prescribed by Rule 4(j). Rather, I ask only if good cause existed for that delay, and I find that it did.
1. Pursuing Discovery
The U.S. Attorney, Stephen Graben, received in fact McDonald’s complaint and summons by mail, and answered timely. In that answer, he pointed out the defect in service, which was proper. But he then began to engage in discovery in earnest. He not only entered into an agreed scheduling order, but propounded interrogatories and…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Armco, Inc. v. Penrod-Stauffer Building Systems, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1984
- Agnes L. Morse v. Elmira Country ClubCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1984
- Robert Norlock v. City of GarlandCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1985
- Stranahan Gear Company, Inc. v. Nl Industries, Inc. v. Blue Streak Industries, Inc. Appeal of Nl Industries, IncCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1986
- Broadcast Music, Inc. v. M.T.S. Enterprises, Inc., Gordon Tonry, and Delores TonryCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1987
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.