Legal Definitions - irregular process

An irregular process refers to a legal action, step, or procedure that deviates from the established, proper, or legally prescribed method. It means that a particular step in a legal proceeding was not carried out according to the rules, statutes, or customary practices that govern it. Such an irregularity can sometimes invalidate the action taken or provide grounds for a legal challenge.

Here are some examples to illustrate this concept:

• Improper Service of Legal Documents:

  Imagine a situation where a person is being sued, and the law requires that the lawsuit papers (known as a summons and complaint) be personally delivered to them or a responsible adult at their home. If, instead, the papers are simply left taped to their front door, and the law does not permit this method, then the service of process (the act of delivering the papers) would be considered an irregular process.

  How it illustrates the term: The method of delivering the lawsuit papers did not follow the specific, legally mandated rules for proper delivery. This deviation from the correct procedure could mean the court does not have proper jurisdiction over the defendant, potentially leading to the lawsuit being dismissed or the service being declared invalid.

• Court Filing Without Required Notice:

  Consider a scenario where a lawyer files an important motion with the court, asking the judge to make a specific decision. However, a local court rule requires that before filing such a motion, the lawyer must first send a copy to the opposing lawyer, giving them a chance to review and respond. If the lawyer files the motion without providing this required advance notice to the other side, the filing could be deemed an irregular process.

  How it illustrates the term: The act of filing the motion bypassed a necessary procedural step designed to ensure fairness and allow all parties to be heard. This procedural misstep makes the filing "irregular" because it did not conform to the established court rules, and the court might refuse to consider the motion or require it to be refiled correctly.

• Flawed Administrative Hearing Notice:

  Suppose a government agency is holding a public hearing to decide on a permit for a new construction project. State law mandates that all property owners within a certain radius of the proposed project must receive written notice of the hearing at least 30 days in advance. If, due to an administrative oversight, some property owners only receive notice 15 days before the hearing, the notification procedure for the hearing would be an irregular process.

  How it illustrates the term: The agency's action of notifying property owners did not comply with the legally required 30-day notice period. This irregularity could invalidate the outcome of the hearing for those who received insufficient notice, potentially requiring the agency to conduct a new hearing after proper notification.