CROSSOVER: Service on an Agent: Using a Power of Attorney to Effectuate Service on Elusive or Incapacitated Parties.

Obaro v. North Woodland Hills Village Cmty. Ass’n, 01-24-00525-CV, February 19, 2026.

On appeal from the 80th District Court of Harris County

Synopsis

The First Court of Appeals held that service of process on an agent designated in a recorded Statutory Durable Power of Attorney is valid and effective, even if the agent attempts to reject the citation or instructs the process server to seek out the principal personally. Where the Power of Attorney grants broad authority over “claims and litigation” under the Texas Estates Code, the agent’s capacity to accept service is a vested legal power that cannot be unilaterally waived to defeat personal jurisdiction.

Relevance to Family Law

For family law litigators, this case provides a powerful tool for effectuating service on elusive respondents, out-of-state parties, or spouses with diminished capacity. In high-conflict divorce or enforcement actions, a party may attempt to avoid service by remaining behind gates or traveling extensively. If that party has executed and recorded a Statutory Durable Power of Attorney (SDPOA)—a common component of Texas estate planning—service on their designated agent is now a confirmed, robust method of obtaining personal jurisdiction, bypassing the arduous requirements of Rule 106 substituted service.

Case Summary

Fact Summary

Duke Obaro was sued by his homeowners’ association for unpaid assessments. When personal service on Obaro proved difficult, the Association discovered a “Statutory Durable Power of Attorney” (“SDPOA”) that Obaro had signed and recorded in the Harris County deed records in 2011. The document appointed Deola Ali as Obaro’s agent and granted her general authority over “claims and litigation.” The Association amended its petition to provide for service on Ali as Obaro’s agent and attached a certified copy of the SDPOA.

When the process server encountered Ali, she refused to accept the papers, argued that the procedure was improper, and directed the server to find Obaro at his residence. The process server, adhering to the “drop service” philosophy, left the papers in Ali’s car and walked away. Obaro did not file an answer, and the trial court granted a default judgment. Obaro later moved to vacate the judgment, supported by a declaration from Ali stating she had affirmatively rejected service. The trial court denied the motion.

Issues Decided

The Court of Appeals addressed two primary issues:

1. Whether a no-answer default judgment is erroneous when service is made on an agent who does not “consent” to accept service at the moment of delivery.
2. Whether an agent’s affirmative rejection of citation invalidates service when the agent holds authority under the Durable Power of Attorney Act.

Rules Applied

The Court relied heavily on the Texas Durable Power of Attorney Act (Texas Estates Code, Title 2, Subtitle P). Specifically:

• Texas Estates Code § 751.031(a): Provides that if a principal grants all powers listed in the Act, the agent has general authority to act on the principal’s behalf.
• Texas Estates Code § 752.110(5): Explicitly states that language conferring authority with respect to “claims and litigation” empowers the agent to “accept service of process.”
• Texas Rules of Civil Procedure: Regarding the “strict compliance” standard for service of process in the context of a default judgment.

Application

The court rejected Obaro’s argument that Section 752.110(5) is merely “permissive.” Obaro contended that because the statute says the agent is empowered to accept service, the agent must still choose to accept it for service to be valid. The Court of Appeals disagreed with this narrow interpretation.

The legal story here is one of agency and vested authority. The Court reasoned that once a principal executes an SDPOA granting authority over litigation, the agent stands in the shoes of the principal for the purpose of receiving notice. The “power” granted by the principal to the agent to accept service is a legal capacity that third parties (and the courts) are entitled to rely upon. If an agent could simply “reject” service to protect the principal, it would render the statutory grant of authority in the Estates Code meaningless. Because the SDPOA was recorded and the authority was “broad and sweeping,” the process server’s delivery to Ali was, in the eyes of the law, delivery to Obaro.

Holding

The Court of Appeals affirmed the default judgment and the order denying the motion to vacate.

The Court held that service of process on an agent designated in a recorded statutory durable power of attorney is valid if the instrument grants authority over claims and litigation. The agent’s subjective intent to “reject” or “refuse” the papers does not override the legal authority granted by the principal in the recorded instrument.

Furthermore, the Court held that the Association strictly complied with the rules of service by alleging the agent’s authority in the petition and attaching the certified SDPOA to the citation. The return of service, which showed hand-delivery to the agent, was sufficient to support the default judgment regardless of the agent’s verbal protestations.

Practical Application

In family law practice, use the real property records as a skip-tracing tool. If a respondent is avoiding service in a modification or enforcement suit, check for a recorded SDPOA. If one exists:
1. Amend your petition to specifically allege service via the agent under the Texas Estates Code.
2. Attach a certified copy of the SDPOA to your citation request.
3. Even if the agent is the respondent’s new spouse or a hostile family member, they cannot “refuse” their way out of the legal effect of the service.

Checklists

Identifying and Utilizing an Agent for Service

• Search County Records: Check the “Official Public Records” or “Deed Records” in the county where the respondent owns property or resides.
• Verify the Instrument: Ensure it is a “Statutory Durable Power of Attorney” and check the “Claims and litigation” box (or ensure it wasn’t crossed out).
• Confirm Recording: While an SDPOA is valid between parties without recording, recording provides the “face of the record” evidence needed to sustain a default judgment on appeal.

Perfecting the Citation Request

• Pleading Requirements: Explicitly cite Texas Estates Code § 752.110(5) in the service paragraph of your petition.
• Attachment: Attach the certified copy of the SDPOA as an exhibit to the petition so it is served alongside the citation.
• Process Server Instructions: Advise the server that the agent may attempt to refuse the papers; instruct them to perform “drop service” if necessary and to document the agent’s identity and the refusal in the return.

Citation

Obaro v. North Woodland Hills Village Cmty. Ass’n, __ S.W.3d __ (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2026, no pet. h.).

Full Opinion

View Full Opinion

Family Law Crossover

This ruling can be effectively weaponized in divorce cases involving “missing” spouses or those residing in jurisdictions with difficult service requirements (including international service under the Hague Convention). If a spouse has left a Power of Attorney with a local family member or a business manager to handle their Texas affairs, you can skip the international service headache and serve the local agent.

Moreover, in “silver divorce” cases where a spouse may be suffering from cognitive decline, serving the agent designated in their SDPOA ensures that the litigation moves forward without the need for a temporary guardianship or an ad litem just to achieve service. Strategically, serving an agent—who may be a professional like a CPA or lawyer—often forces a faster response than serving a recalcitrant party, as professionals are less likely to ignore the legal ramifications of a “drop service” delivery.

~~bd2ba8a8-dea4-461a-a28d-0a23e0a567a9~~