Court addresses adequacy of service after defendants are defaulted.

In Bullington v. Corbell, et al., the Plaintiff obtained an injury verdict against one individual and two other entities by default.  The defendants argued that the plaintiff's attorney had been allowed to abuse the legal rules for service of process and that they did not learn of the pending action until they had already been defaulted.  The Court of Appeals judges pointed out that notice of a pending claim is essential to due process and that in this case, the rules of service of process, and substituted service, had been violated by plaintiff and the lower court.  On that basis, it reversed the default judgment and sent the case back to the lower court for appropriate remedial action.