[Deschler's Precedents, Volume 2, Chapters 7 - 9]
[Chapter 9.  Election Contests]
[F. Notice of Contest]
[Â§ 21. Service of Notice]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]


[Page 1032]
 
                               CHAPTER 9
 
                           Election Contests
 
                          F. NOTICE OF CONTEST
 
Sec. 21. Service of Notice

    Under the Federal Contested Elections Act, the notice of contest 
must be served on contestee in the manner specified. The notice may be 
served on contestee by delivery of a copy to him personally or to his 
authorized agent, by leaving a copy at his home or place of business, 
or by mailing a copy to him by registered or certified 
mail.(10)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
10. 2 USC Sec. 382(c), (1)-(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Service by mail is complete on mailing, and the return receipt from 
the post office is proof thereof. Proof of service must be made to the 
Clerk promptly and within the time allowed for contestee's answer, but 
the failure to do so does not affect the validity of the 
service.(11)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
11. 2 USC Sec. 382(c), (5), 
        (6).                          -------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Substituted Service

Sec. 21.1 Subsequent valid service of notice of contest renders moot 
    any question of the efficacy of prior attempted ``substituted 
    service.''

    In the 1957 Iowa election contest of Carter v LeCompte (Sec. 57.1, 
infra), the official result of the election was not determined until 
Dec. 10, 1956, but the contestant had earlier served the contestee by 
``substituted service.'' The election committee majority decided that 
the contestant's subsequent personal service on the contestee on Dec. 
17, rendered ``moot any question as to the sufficiency of the service 
contemplated by 2 USC Sec. 201.'' (12)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
12. This is now 2 USC Sec. 382(a).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the 1957 Iowa election contest of Dolliver v Coad (Sec. 57.2, 
infra), the issue arose as to whether ``substituted service,'' as 
provided under Rules 4(d)(1) and 56(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil 
Procedure, complied with the requirements of proper service under 2 USC 
Sec. 201, but the election committee did not decide the issue. Under 
the present 2 USC  382(c), however, ``substituted service'' is 
permissible.

[[Page 1033]]