A recent New York state court decision garnered national attention for permitting the plaintiff in a matrimonial case to serve divorce papers on her husband solely by sending him the divorce summons in a private message via Facebook (Baidoo v. Blood-Dzraku, No. 14-cv-310947, (Sup. Ct. N.Y. Co. Mar. 27, 2015)). Serving process solely through Facebook is a novel approach. As the Baidoo court acknowledged, only one other New York state court has permitted service of process via Facebook, and in that case the petitioner was directed to also mail a copy of the papers to the respondent's last known address (see In re Noel B. v. Anna Maria A., No. F-00787-13/14B (Fam. Ct. Richmond Co. Sept. 12, 2014)). Other courts have permitted plaintiffs to serve papers in part through social media platforms (see, for example, WhosHere, Inc. v. Orun, No. 13-cv-00526, , at *1 (E.D. Va. Feb. 20, 2014) (permitting plaintiff to serve process by email, Facebook and LinkedIn) and Fed. Trade Comm'n v. PCCare247 Inc., No. 12-cv-7189, , at *1 (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 7, 2013) (permitting plaintiff to serve interlocutory papers by e-mail and Facebook)).

Plaintiff's counsel must carefully review all authorized methods of service of process in the jurisdiction where the case was commenced. In New York, a party may serve process on a natural person:

(CPLR 308.)

The court may also direct an alternative method of service if it finds that the methods authorized by CPLR 308 are impracticable (CPLR 308(5)). Whether service is impracticable depends on the facts and circumstances of the case (see Markoff v. S. Nassau Cmty. Hosp., 458 N.Y.S.2d 672, 673 (2d Dep't 1983), aff'd, 473 N.Y.S.2d 766 (1984)).

In Baidoo, the plaintiff asked the court's permission to serve the defendant with a divorce summons solely by sending it in a private message through Facebook. The plaintiff claimed that she could not serve process on the defendant using the methods authorized by CPLR 308 because she could not locate him.

At the outset of its decision, the court noted that the New York legislature last amended the law concerning service of process on individuals in 1994, at the dawn of the internet age. Nevertheless, within the past decade courts have routinely permitted service of process by e-mail. The court also noted that social media websites such as Facebook play a central role in the lives of many. According to Facebook's website, there were 890 million daily active Facebook users worldwide at the end of 2014.

The Baidoo court granted the plaintiff's request to serve the summons solely via Facebook as an alternative method of service under CPLR 308(5), but only after:

To effect service, the court directed plaintiff's counsel to:

Before even considering serving process on a defendant via Facebook, plaintiff's counsel must know how to serve process using the traditional methods authorized by statute. Practical Law has several resources on serving process in New York, including:

Practical Law also has resources to help attorneys comply with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4, which governs service of process in federal courts, including Practice Note, Commencing a Federal Lawsuit: Filing and Serving the Complaint and Standard Document, Affidavit of Service (Fed. R. Civ. P. 4).