The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals has reversed a lower court's decision that dismissed a lawsuit filed by Glenn and Rhonda Larkins against S.D.P. Manufacturing and several related corporate entities. This ruling, issued on June 18, 2026, is significant because it clarifies the standards for serving legal documents in Texas, particularly regarding the diligence required by plaintiffs to ensure timely service.
The Larkinses were injured when a derrick manufactured by S.D.P. Manufacturing tipped over while Glenn was performing maintenance. After waiting two years, they filed a lawsuit against the manufacturer and several leasing companies on the last day allowed by Texas law. However, their case faced dismissal due to claims of insufficient diligence in serving the defendants.
Background
The dispute began when Glenn Larkins was injured while working on a defective transformer. He and his wife, Rhonda, decided to sue S.D.P. Manufacturing and several corporate entities that had leased the derrick to Larkins's employer. The couple filed their lawsuit in Texas state court on the final day of the statute of limitations, which is two years after the incident occurred.
After filing, the Larkinses received citations to serve the defendants the following day. However, there were delays in serving the defendants, which led to the case being removed to federal court. The lower court ruled that the Larkinses had not acted diligently in serving the defendants, leading to the dismissal of their case. The Larkinses appealed this decision, which brought the case before the Fifth Circuit Court.
The Ruling
The Fifth Circuit Court ruled in favor of the Larkinses, stating that the lower court had applied too strict a standard for diligence in serving the defendants. The court emphasized that Texas law requires only ordinary diligence, not the highest degree of diligence. The opinion stated, "We conclude that the district court was more demanding than Texas law requires."
The court noted that the Larkinses had forwarded their service citations to a process server just three days after filing their complaint. They allowed the process server a reasonable amount of time to attempt service, which included 18 business days to serve multiple similarly named corporate defendants. The court further explained that the Larkinses' attorney had been distracted by a fire in an unrelated courthouse, which contributed to the delays.
Impact
This ruling is important for plaintiffs in Texas as it clarifies the expectations for diligence in serving legal documents. The Fifth Circuit's decision reinforces that a plaintiff's efforts to serve a defendant will not be deemed insufficient solely based on minor delays, as long as the plaintiff demonstrates reasonable efforts to achieve timely service.
The ruling also highlights that the determination of diligence is typically a factual question, meaning that it should be evaluated based on the specific circumstances of each case. This could lead to more cases being allowed to proceed even if there are some delays in service, as long as the plaintiffs can provide reasonable explanations for those delays.
What's Next
The case has been reversed and remanded for further proceedings, meaning it will go back to the lower court for additional consideration. It is unclear whether the defendants will seek to appeal this decision further, but for now, the Larkinses have the opportunity to continue their lawsuit against S.D.P. Manufacturing and the other corporate entities involved.