Judge pauses divorce hearing after service and deposition dispute; process server testimony questioned

A contested family-law matter that began as a service-of-process and deposition dispute was stayed by the court after testimony raised questions about who received what paperwork and because a lawyer for a party became an essential witness.

Douglas Strickler, identified in court as the director of security for the state trial courts who sometimes performs process service work for a private company, testified that he personally served a woman at a Cheatham County address and that he remembered "serving this woman" on an early rainy Saturday. During cross-examination, he said he typically does not open or read entire packets before serving—they are presented to him in stacks—and that his return-of-service form uses standard language such as "served summons and complaint" even if he did not read every page. Strickler also testified the documents he was handed for that date were not in an envelope…