If the individual is an infant or incompetent person, process may be served upon the individual by one of the foregoing methods, or as follows:
An affidavit of the person making service must be filed with the court, stating the time, manner, and place of service. Such service has the same force and effect as service within the state.
If a defendant located within any state or territory of the United States fails to comply with a request for waiver made by a plaintiff located within any state or territory of the United States, the court shall impose the costs subsequently incurred in effecting service on the defendant unless good cause for the failure be shown.
V.R.C.P. 4
Reporter's Notes-2025 Amendment
Rule 4(c) permits any superior judge to appoint an indifferent person to serve process. The rule is amended to reflect the 2010 restructuring of the judiciary by omitting the phrase permitting appointment by "a judge of the court to which it is returnable." A cross-reference to service under paragraph (d)(2) is added because that paragraph now includes provisions for mail service by plaintiff or plaintiff's attorney that do not require a sheriff or other official. Other changes are made for clarity with no change of meaning intended.
The caption and text of Rules 4(d) and 4(e) are amended to delete the references to "personal" service. This clarifies that Rules 4(d) and 4(e) authorize methods of substituted service not within the common meaning of personal service as in-hand delivery to the person to be served.
Rule 4(d)(2) is amended to aggregate into a single subdivision the methods of service on the State of Vermont or any agency or officer thereof. Former Rule 4(f)(2), relating to mail service on an officer of the state as a statutory process agent, is moved to Rule 4(d)(2). The existing provision of Rule 4(d)(2), for service in false claims actions, is reworded for clarity with no change of meaning intended. As stated in the prior reporter's note, "The provision in the rule for service 'by any method of delivery requiring the signature of an addressee or an agent of an addressee' is intended to include service by registered mail, certified mail, commercial carrier, or in-hand delivery." See V.R.C.P. 4(d)(2), Reporter's Notes-2016 Amendment.
Rule 4(f) is recaptioned "Service by Mail Outside the State." The text is reorganized to clarify each step in the mail service process and, in some cases, to modify the requirements of the existing rule.
Rule 4(f)(1) clarifies what was implicit in the original rule, that it applies only to service by mail outside the state. The jurisdictional requirements of Rule 4(e) for service outside the state are repeated in the text of Rule 4(f)(1)(B). The rule remains limited to two special classes of cases involving property and divorce, Rule 4(f)(1)(C)(i) and (ii).
Rule 4(f)(2) changes the requirement to use "registered or certified mail, with restricted delivery and return receipt requested" to any mail delivery method that "requires a signature by the addressee or the agent of the addressee for receipt of mail." The change reflects 1 V.S.A. § 134a, which states that registered mail in this context includes "any method of mail delivery requiring the signature of the addressee or his or her agent." See V.R.C.P. 4, Reporter's Notes-2016 Amendment.
Rule 4(f)(3) clarifies when service by first-class mail under Rule 4(f) is permitted and how it is completed. The requirements that the first-class mailing use the last known address of the person to be served, and that the mailing not be returned as undeliverable, are new. They are intended to assure that the method of service "be such as is reasonably calculated to reach interested parties." Mullane v. Cent. Hanover Bank & Tr. Co., 339 U.S. 306, 318 (1950).
Reporter's Notes-2022 Amendment
Rules 4(b) and 4(l)(3)(D) and (H) are amended for consistency with the amendment of V.R.C.P. 84 and the abrogation of the Appendix of Forms consistent with the Supreme Court's transfer to the Court Administrator of the authority to amend and adopt forms and publish them on the Judiciary website. See Reporter's Notes to the simultaneous amendment of Rule 84, and abrogation of the Appendix of Forms.
Reporter's Notes-2020 Amendment
Rule 4(b) is amended to clarify that its cross references are to the 2010 or 2020 Vermont Rules for Electronic filing, if either is applicable.
Reporter's Notes -2018 Amendment
Rule 4(g)(3) is amended to extend its 20-day time period to 21 days consistent with the simultaneous "day is a day" amendments to V.R.C.P. 6. Rule 4 (/)(3)(F) is amended to shorten the time for return of a waiver of service from 60 to 42 days. The existing rule allowed too much time to make this method of service feasible for timely commencement under Rule 3 in the case of a defendant outside any state or territory of the United States.
Reporter's Notes-2016 Amendment
Rule 4(d)(2) is amended to provide a uniform, easily administered method of service of complaints and material information on the Vermont Attorney General as required by the state and federal False Claims Acts. See 32 V.S.A. § 632(b)(3); 31 U.S.C. § 3730(b)(2). The state act provides for service on the Attorney General "in accordance with the Rules of Civil Procedure."32 V.S.A. § 632(b)(3). F.R.C.P. 40) requires service on the state to be on the chief executive officer or pursuant to the state rules of civil procedure.
With the enactment of 32 V.S.A. § 632, Vermont has been added to several pending and anticipated federal qui tam suits by relators' counsels. The most common methods of service of the complaint and material disclosures by the federal qui tam bar in other jurisdictions have been by registered or certified mail or by private process servers. In Vermont, relators' attorneys have agreed to accomplish service by sheriff. The provision in the rule for service "by any method of delivery requiring the signature of an addressee or an agent of an addressee" is intended to include service by registered mail, certified mail, commercial carrier, or in-hand delivery. Availability of these commonly used methods of process for both state and federal cases will obviate the need for the Attorney General's Office to contact counsel in every case to request service by sheriff.