Side view of office building windows
Compliance19 September, 2022|AktualisiertOktober 02, 2024

The risks of being your own registered agent

Choosing a registered agent is a critical issue for newly forming and qualifying companies. In choosing whether to appoint an individual (such as yourself, or an attorney or person within your organization) or a corporate registered agent, the company’s owners, as well as business lawyers who advise the owners on this issue, should take into consideration certain risks inherent in choosing an individual.

Nearly every corporation, LLC, or LP is required to appoint and continuously maintain a registered agent in its state of formation and in every state in which it is qualified to do business as a foreign entity. This is an agent to whom a summons, complaint, or other initial litigation documents can be served. The registered agent also receives official communications on behalf of the company.

A plaintiff does not, in general, have to serve the registered agent. The service of process rules typically allows an officer, managing agent, general agent, or certain other persons authorized by the company or law to receive process documents.

However, plaintiffs often prefer to serve registered agents for two main reasons:

  • A registered agent is easier to locate. The plaintiff need only check the Secretary of State’s records to find the name and address. Locating an in-state officer, managing, general or other agent can be much more difficult.
  • Serving a person other than the registered agent can result in costly and time-consuming disputes over whether the person served was authorized by the defendant to receive process on its behalf.

CT tip: In general, a person may be considered a “managing agent” or “general agent” for service of process purposes if that person’s position, rank, and duties make it reasonably certain that the defendant will be apprised that service of process occurred. This determination is within the court’s discretion and is decided on a case-by-case basis. The outcome can be hard to predict.

The appointment of a registered agent

The initial registered or statutory agent for a corporation, LLC, or LP is set forth in the entity’s formation document that is filed in its domestic state. When a company qualifies in a foreign state, the name and address of its registered agent located in that foreign state is set forth in its application for authority.

The choice of registered agent, like the choice of entity type, formation state, and entity name, is one of the earliest and most important decisions that a business entity's owners can make.

Unfortunately, the choosing of a registered agent is not always given the appropriate level of attention that’s needed - which can end up being a costly mistake.

Individual vs. corporate registered agents

In general, a corporation, LLC, or LP's owners will make one of the following choices:

  • They will appoint an individual such as an attorney, owner, member, partner or manager.
  • They will appoint a company in the business of providing registered agent services - which is sometimes known as a “professional registered agent” or a “commercial registered agent”.

There are a number of factors to consider in deciding whether to appoint an individual or a professional registered agent. One major factor is that there are risks involved in appointing an individual. Below are some of the risks to be aware of before deciding to appoint yourself or another individual as registered agent.

Risk 1: An individual will not be in the office

There is the risk that you or the individual you have designated as the registered agent may not be at the office location registered with the state when process is delivered. This can result in a couple of problems.

Risk of default judgment because of “substituted service”

One problem is that in some states, an unsuccessful attempt at serving the registered agent allows a court to order “substituted service”, such as by serving the Secretary of State or by posting or publishing the process documents. Substituted service is not as reliable in providing actual notice of litigation as direct service (such as in-person delivery or certified mail, return receipt requested). This, in turn, can result in the company failing to respond in time, which can result in a default judgment. The following case illustrates this point:

The Texas Court of Appeals affirmed the default judgment against two LLCs, finding that service of process on the Texas Secretary of State was valid where the plaintiff’s process server was unable to serve the individual listed as the LLCs’ registered agent because he was no longer located at the address listed on the state’s records. The court noted that the Texas Business Organizations Code provides that if a registered agent cannot, with reasonable diligence, be found at the registered office, the Secretary of State is deemed agent for service of process. The LLCs failed to articulate any excuse for their failure to update their registered office information as they were required by statute to do, and it was their own negligence that caused their failure to respond to the lawsuit. Huffman Asset Management, LLC v. Colter, 2023 Tex. App. LEXIS 8429

Legal documents were left with another person

There is another problem with the registered agent not being in the office when the process server or mail carrier arrives. The documents may be left with another person at the office or signed for by someone other than registered agent. This sometimes results in neither the registered agent nor counsel receiving notice of the lawsuit in time to respond. Take for example the following case. The US Bankruptcy Court upheld a $785,000 default judgment against a Kansas LLC. Process was served by certified mail, return receipt requested to the registered office and was signed by an unknown individual with the Agent box checked. The LLC’s counsel conceded that the registered office was never staffed and proffered no evidence showing excusable neglect of why it failed to staff the registered office. The court noted that under Kansas law, a Kansas LLC is required to have and maintain a registered office and resident agent in the state and a Kansas LLC that disregards these statutory requirements does so at its own peril. Andover Senior Care LLC v. Called to Care Invs. Kan. LLC (In re Andover Senior Care LLC) 2024 Bankr. Lexis 634.

Trust our expertise

More business and legal professionals consistently choose CT Corporation to meet their business' legal compliance needs.

Risk 2: Registered agent information is not updated in a timely manner

Another risk is that the designated individual may move his or her office, or may leave the company’s employ, be transferred to another state, or for another reason need to be replaced. In those cases, the registered agent’s name and/or address on file with the Secretary of State will have to be updated. If there is a gap in time before the records are updated, the company may not receive notice of litigation. Take the following case:

An LLC in Illinois designated an individual member as its registered agent and his residence as its registered office. The process server went to the registered office and served an individual with the same name as the registered agent. However, the person served was actually the registered agent’s father, who was not associated with the LLC. The registered agent no longer lived there. The member had failed to tell the LLC he had moved, and the registered office was never changed on the state’s records. The LLC failed to respond, and a default judgment was issued.

The Illinois Appellate Court upheld the judgment, noting that it might have decided differently if the father was served at any other location. However, the LLC had absolute control over the identification and location of its registered agent and cannot escape the consequences where, as here, the summons was served in accordance with its own directions. Pickens v. Aahmes, 104 N.E. 3d 507 (Ill. App. 2019)

Risk 3: Mishandling or ignoring process

Another risk is that an individual registered agent may mishandle or ignore the documents because of a lack of training. Or he or she may have been busy with his or her own regular work or was distracted by personal issues. Unfortunately, there are a number of examples of this risk, including the following:

A lawsuit was filed in California against a corporation for defective performance of a plumbing subcontract. By the time the suit was filed the corporation had filed for voluntary dissolution. The corporation’s registered agent at the time of dissolution was its lawyer.

California, like other states, provides that dissolved corporations continue to exist for the purposes of winding up and can defend suits brought against them. California law also provides a dissolved corporation may be served by serving an agent authorized to receive service of process at the time of dissolution. Consequently, the lawyer was still an authorized agent for service of process.

The lawyer admitted he received the summons and complaint. However, he believed he was no longer an authorized process agent because the corporation was dissolved. He failed to inform anyone associated with the corporation about the lawsuit. Of course, the corporation never appeared, and the plaintiff received a default judgment, which was upheld on appeal.

In rejecting the corporation’s request that the default be vacated on the equitable ground that there was “excusable neglect,” the court said:

“[I]n light of the statutory directive that a dissolved corporation may be served by serving its agent for service of process at the time of dissolution, anybody who steps up to be a corporation's agent for service of process faces at least the possibility of being served on behalf of the corporation after it has dissolved. We therefore hold that a dissolved corporation cannot claim excusable neglect when its agent for service of process at the time of dissolution has not made any effort to notify it and has not shown that an effort, if made, would have failed.”

Pulte Homes Corp. v. Williams Mechanical, Inc. 206 Cal. Rptr.3d 244 (4th Dist. 2016)

Conclusion

No business owner or business lawyer should underestimate the importance of choosing the right registered agent. The registered agent must be responsible and competent, or the consequences can be disastrous. For that reason, the appointment of a professional registered agent rather than an individual should be given serious consideration.

Learn more

Safeguard your business with professional registered agent services. Contact CT Corporation today.

Sandra Feldman
Publications Attorney
Sandra (Sandy) Feldman has been with CT Corporation since 1985 and has been the Publications Attorney since 1988. Sandy stays on top of the most pressing and pertinent business entity law issues that impact CT customers of all sizes and segments.

Back To Top