Service by Email, Social Media, and Text Message
Illinois Supreme Court Rule 102(f) allows for service upon a respondent via email, social media, or text message in certain circumstances. If it is believed to be impossible to serve the respondent or someone over the age of thirteen (13) at respondent’s “usual place of abode” personally, the petitioner may file a motion requesting the court allow service by technology. Ill. Sup. Ct. R 102(f); see also 735 ILCS 5/2-203(a). In that motion, the moving party must convince the court that the respondent has access to the technology and that the email address, social media account, or phone number is current by filing an affidavit in support. Ill. Sup. Ct. R 102(f)(1), (2). The affidavit must show reasonable efforts on behalf of the moving party to locate the respondent and specifics as to why personal service would be impractical. 735 ILCS 5/2 203.1. If the court permits service by technology, the respondent must be served within ten (10) days. Ill. Sup. Ct. R 102(f)(3).
The communication to the respondent must include copies of the summons, the petition for dissolution of marriage, and any other required documents relevant to the case. Ill. Sup. Ct. R 102(f)(3). The message or email must contain the following: “Important info – you have been sued. Read all of the documents attached to this message. To participate in the case, you must follow the instructions listed in the attached summons. If you do not the court may decide the case without hearing from you, and you could lose the case.” Ill. Sup. Ct. R 102(f)(1)(A).
The person serving the respondent will then file proof of service with the court. Ill. Sup. Ct. R 102(f)(4). The proof of service will contain the details of how the service was made, including the date of service; the specific social media account, email address, or phone number that was served; respondent’s last known address; certification that copies of the summons, petition for dissolution, and other required documents were attached to the message; and the date on which the copies were mailed to respondent’s last known address; and an image of the social media message, email, or text message sent to respondent. Ill. Sup. Ct. R 102(f)(4)(A), (B).
In Marian Realty, Inc. v. Woodland, the defendant in an eviction action was originally improperly served by the summons being placed beneath his door. 2024 IL App (1st) 232371-U. After several failed attempts to personally serve the defendant, the plaintiff filed a motion pursuant to Illinois Supreme Court Rule 102 to serve the defendant via email, claiming that attempts at personal service had proven “difficult and impractical.” Marian Realty, 2024 IL App (1s) 232371-U ¶8. Plaintiff argued that the defendant clearly had access to technology as he had previously filed his motion to quash service electronically. Id. The plaintiff then sent the relevant documentation via email, first-class mail, and FedEx delivery. Marian Realty, 2024 IL App (1s) 232371-U ¶9. However, upon delivery of the email, an automated response was returned saying the email was undeliverable. Id. Despite this, the court defaulted the defendant, prompting him to appeal the judgment. Marian Realty, 2024 IL App (1s) 232371-U ¶10, ¶11. The circuit court agreed with the defendant that the service was improper and his eviction order was vacated. Marian Realty, 2024 IL App (1s) 232371-U ¶12.
While service by technology is not standard service practice, it may be allowed in certain circumstances with the court’s permission where either the respondent cannot be located, is repeatedly and intentionally avoiding service, or does not have a “usual place of abode” where they may reasonably be served. However, this service must be done according to Illinois Supreme Court Rule 102(f), or else the court may lack jurisdiction over the respondent and any judgment against them may be thrown out.