## Facts

- A judgment creditor obtained a writ of garnishment directed to Emery Worldwide, Inc. as corporate garnishee.
- The writ was served at Emery’s Miami–Dade facility on Xavier Jasso, identified in the return of service as “general manager,” and served “in the absence of any superior officer” listed in Fla. Stat. § 48.081.
- Emery did not answer the writ, and a clerk’s default was entered.
- Emery moved to quash service and vacate the default, submitting an affidavit from its vice president stating:
  - Emery’s registered agent and the vice president were not served;
  - there were no “general managers” at that facility;
  - Jasso was a “gateway manager” not authorized to accept service; and
  - the vice president was present at the facility when service was attempted.

- After an evidentiary hearing, the trial court denied Emery’s motion, concluding the affidavit did not provide clear and convincing evidence to overcome the presumption that the return of service was valid.

## Issues

1. Whether service of a writ of garnishment on a corporation complies with Fla. Stat. § 48.081 when made on an employee described as a “general manager” despite the availability of a higher-ranking officer or registered agent.
2. Whether a corporate officer’s sworn affidavit can constitute clear and convincing evidence sufficient to rebut the presumptive validity of a return of service and require vacatur of a clerk’s default.

## Decision

- The appellate court reversed the order denying the motion to quash service and to vacate the clerk’s default.
- The court held service was defective because the statutory hierarchy for corporate service under § 48.081 was not followed when a higher-ranking officer was available.
- The court held Emery’s vice president affidavit was clear and convincing evidence rebutting the return’s assertions that a superior officer was absent and that the person served was a proper corporate recipient.
- The case was remanded for further proceedings.

## Legal Principles

- Fla. Stat. § 48.081 establishes a hierarchy for serving process on a corporation; when reasonably possible, service must be made on the registered agent or higher-ranking corporate officers before resorting to lower-level officers or agents.
- The purpose of the statutory hierarchy is to ensure service is made, when possible, on responsible corporate officials rather than inferior employees.
- A process server’s return of service is presumptively valid, but the presumption may be overcome by clear and convincing evidence.
- When service is defective under § 48.081, a default entered for failure to respond to the improperly served process should be vacated.

## Conclusion

The court held that serving a writ of garnishment on a lower-level manager was invalid where a vice president was present and the registered agent was not served; the affidavit evidence rebutted the return of service and required quashing service and vacating the default.


Emery Worldwide, Inc. v. Indem. Ins. Co. of N. Am., 797 So. 2d 623 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2001)