1. Why is the law so concerned with proper service of process?
2. Why did the Oregon Court of Appeals rule that the alternative service of process was invalid?
3. If the circumstances allow a court in the plaintiff’s state to assert jurisdiction over an out-of-state defendant, what is the proper method of serving process?

Richardson, Presiding Judge
Defendant seeks vacation of a default judgment, contending that the trial court lacked jurisdiction over him. We reverse. Plaintiff’s complaint was filed on December 5, 1985. Defendant, a student of the University of Oregon, lived in Eugene. He was a member of a fraternity but did not reside at the fraternity house. Personal service was attempted at the fraternity house from December 29 through February 19, 1986. No attempt was made to serve defendant at his residence even though his address was available from the university. On March 4, the trial court granted plaintiff’s motion for alternative service. The motion was supported by the affidavit of Hoyt, which states: