Courts

The ‘Slide Into Her DMs’ Rule Of Service For Civ Pro Buffs

Model persuasively challenges service via DM.

Bruna Lírio (Photo by Rachpoot/Bauer-Griffin/GC Images)

Move over Mailbox Rule, there’s a new theory of service out there.

The plaintiffs in Sulici and Chihaia v. Color Image Apparel et al. purported to serve defendant Bruna Lírio by depositing the complaint in her Instagram DMs. When Lírio failed to respond, the Northern District of Illinois entered default judgment against her.

She’s now challenging the default asking for more time to respond to the complaint — and the plaintiffs aren’t contesting.

It might seem odd for plaintiffs to concede a default this easily, but it’s probably because Lírio’s reasoning seems pretty sound:

Nestled between gooner6969420’s “U R so hot!!” and patrioteagle4547’s “go back where you came from” is not the optimal location for a summons. Are DMs presumptively an improper avenue of service or should the exclusion be limited to public figures dealing with various levels of online harassment? Should it matter how vile and therefore reasonably ignored a person’s DMs are? Seems like a final exam hypo.

It’s actually unclear why anyone would think a model spends her day meticulously scanning her messages for insightful conversation, but the case is about social media so maybe it seemed apropos.

The class action complaint alleges that ALO Yoga deceptively marketed its goods through undisclosed relationships with influencers like Lírio. The FTC is pretty adamant about covert advertisements on social media… or at least they were before the current administration started firing commissioners and selling memecoin from the Oval Office. Using one’s personal brand to hawk garbage on an unsuspecting public is the whole Trump business plan so it’s hard to imagine those rules hold up. Still, the plaintiffs have claims that sound in state consumer laws and general common law principles.

For what it’s worth, Lírio also received service via her email inbox, though that’s also a business account she doesn’t monitor, leaving it to an assistant to flag important messages. Honestly, “you’re being sued” probably should’ve trickled up through that process, but the plaintiffs aren’t pressing the issue.

At least no one tried to serve her over LinkedIn. What kind of psychopath checks that daily?


HeadshotJoe Patrice is a senior editor at Above the Law and co-host of Thinking Like A Lawyer. Feel free to email any tips, questions, or comments. Follow him on Twitter or Bluesky if you’re interested in law, politics, and a healthy dose of college sports news. Joe also serves as a Managing Director at RPN Executive Search.