Upon a verified motion filed by any party setting forth facts sufficient to show that prior attempts to obtain service pursuant to the trial rules have been unsuccessful, the court in which any action is pending may make an appropriate order for service in any other manner that is reasonably calculated to give the defendant actual knowledge of the proceedings and an opportunity to be heard. Such other forms of service may include social media, email, or other technology.
Rule 4.14.Service Under Special Order of Court
Current through July 1, 2026 · Last verified July 13, 2026
In one sentenceRule 4.14 lets a court order an alternative way to serve someone — including through social media, email, or other technology — once a party files a verified motion showing that the usual methods of service have already been tried and failed.
Full Text of Rule 4.14
Amendment History
This rule’s current text took effect January 1, 2026. For the full history of earlier amendments and adoption orders, see the Indiana Office of Court Services.
Plain-English Summary
Some defendants can’t be reached through any of the methods the trial rules already spell out — personal delivery, mail, the sheriff, even publication. Rule 4.14 gives the court one more tool for that situation. A party has to file a verified motion — sworn to under oath, not just an ordinary unsworn filing — laying out facts that show earlier attempts at service under the trial rules already failed. If the court is satisfied, it can order service by any other method reasonably calculated to give the defendant actual notice and a real chance to respond.
The rule names three examples of what that alternative method might look like: social media, email, or other technology. Those aren’t the only options — the rule’s language covers any other manner that meets the notice standard — but naming them makes clear that a court can authorize service through a defendant’s social media account or an email address the defendant has used before, when the traditional paper-based methods have already come up empty.
The core requirement carries through everything: whatever method the court approves has to be reasonably calculated to give the defendant actual knowledge of the proceedings and an opportunity to be heard. A court asked to authorize this kind of service typically wants to see that the party seeking it made a real effort under the ordinary rules first, and that the method proposed here is likely to work, not just technically available.
Frequently Asked Questions
What does it take to get a court order for alternative service under Rule 4.14?
A verified motion — one sworn to under oath — that lays out facts showing earlier attempts at service under the ordinary trial rules already failed. The court then has to be convinced that the alternative method being proposed is reasonably calculated to give the defendant real notice of the case and a chance to respond, not just a technical way of checking a box.
Can someone be served through social media in Indiana?
Yes, if a court approves it under Rule 4.14. The rule specifically lists social media as one example of the kind of alternative service a court can order, alongside email and other technology, once a party shows the usual methods of service already came up short.
Is email service of a lawsuit allowed in Indiana?
It can be, with court approval. Rule 4.14 names email as one of the forms of alternative service a court may authorize by special order, provided the moving party’s verified motion shows the standard methods of service already failed and the email method proposed is likely to reach the defendant.
Does a party need to try regular service first before asking for alternative service?
Yes. Rule 4.14 requires the verified motion to set out facts showing that prior attempts at service under the trial rules were unsuccessful. A court is unlikely to authorize an unconventional method like email or social media without first seeing that the ordinary channels were tried and didn’t work.
What’s the difference between service by publication and service under special court order?
Service by publication under Rule 4.13 follows a fixed newspaper process with set deadlines. Service under Rule 4.14 is more flexible: a court crafts whatever method fits the situation, based on facts a party presents in a verified motion, as long as the method chosen is reasonably calculated to give the defendant actual notice. Courts sometimes turn to Rule 4.14 for defendants that publication is unlikely to reach in any meaningful way.
When did Indiana start allowing service by social media or email?
Rule 4.14 was amended effective January 1, 2026, to spell out social media, email, and other technology as examples of the alternative service a court can order. Before that, the rule’s broader language about ordering service by an unlisted method already gave courts room to authorize newer methods, but the current version names them directly.
Source & verification. The rule text is reproduced verbatim from the
official Indiana Rules of Trial Procedure (T.R. 4.14). Prescribed by the Supreme Court of Indiana, under its inherent constitutional rulemaking power (reaffirmed by Ind. Code 34-8-1-1 and 34-8-2-1); originally enacted by the Indiana General Assembly in 1969. The plain-English summary is original and written by us. Last verified July 13, 2026. ·
Official source
Also known as: serve someone by social media indiana lawsuitemail service of process indianacant serve defendant any other way indianaverified motion for alternative service indianatrial rule 4.14social media service of process indianaspecial order of court for service