Joseph H. Reeves v. Wilson Floor and Wallcovering, Inc. (Appeal from Autauga Circuit Court: CV-17-900124).

Summary

The Supreme Court of Alabama held that the trial court could not dismiss Reeves's claims against the corporate defendant under Rule 4(i)(2)(C), even though the attempted service was technically ineffective. The record showed that a corporate officer actually received the summons and complaint at the corporation's address within the time necessary to avoid default, so the saving provision barred dismissal. The court reversed the dismissal and remanded for further proceedings.