Practice question
Thirty calendar days have passed since issuance and the server’s receipt, and the summons remains unserved. The court has not recalled it. The plaintiff says the service-performance period automatically made the summons void and requires a new alias solely for that reason. Which is correct?
- The thirty-day service requirement does not itself override section 4’s continuing validity until service or court recall
- Every unserved summons expires automatically after thirty days
- Every failed service automatically dismisses the claim with prejudice
- The server may ignore all reporting duties because summons remains valid
- The court permanently loses subject-matter jurisdiction when thirty days pass
Legal references
- https://lawphil.net/courts/rules/am_19-10-20-sc_2019.html — current Rule 14 sections 2–6 and 20–21, continuing validity, court recall, alias after loss or destruction, proper service and return.
Answer this question in flashcards to review your response and continue practicing.