{"podcast":{"title":"Swear on the Stand","slug":"swear-on-the-stand-7111404","podcast_index_feed_id":7111404,"rss_url":"https://anchor.fm/s/fddb5314/podcast/rss","website_url":"https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/danielswear","image_url":"https://d3t3ozftmdmh3i.cloudfront.net/staging/podcast_uploaded_nologo/42490093/42490093-1732466737482-64af1021e8b8d.jpg","author":"Daniel W. Swear","episode_count":193,"summary":"Court decisions are complex and difficult to digest. This podcast is designed to educating listeners on current legal decisions in a fun and interesting way. Researched by me and produced with the assistance of AI.","last_synced_at":"2026-07-10T22:18:10.447360+00:00","page_url":"https://stenobird.com/podcast/swear-on-the-stand-7111404"},"episode":{"title":"Larkins v. S.D.P. Manufacturing: Due Diligence in Process Service","slug":"larkins-v-s-d-p-manufacturing-due-diligence-in-process-service","published_at":"2026-07-08T12:00:00+00:00","page_url":"https://stenobird.com/podcast/swear-on-the-stand-7111404/larkins-v-s-d-p-manufacturing-due-diligence-in-process-service","show_page_url":"https://stenobird.com/podcast/swear-on-the-stand-7111404","url":"https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/danielswear/episodes/Larkins-v--S-D-P--Manufacturing-Due-Diligence-in-Process-Service-e3l1cvs","audio_url":"https://anchor.fm/s/fddb5314/podcast/play/121729468/https%3A%2F%2Fd3ctxlq1ktw2nl.cloudfront.net%2Fstaging%2F2026-5-19%2F7f2b1a59-9a8d-5c05-8589-145a96113f58.m4a","summary":"This episode details a Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals decision regarding whether a lawsuit was filed and served within the required statute of limitations . The court reversed a lower court's dismissal of the case, ruling that the plaintiffs demonstrated sufficient diligence in effecting service despite a 50-day delay. The opinion clarifies that under Texas law , plaintiffs are held to a standard of ordinary prudence rather than perfection, especially when facing external disruptions like a courthouse fire. By providing a bona fide explanation for lapses in communication with their process server, the plaintiffs created a factual dispute that should be decided by a jury rather than a judge. Ultimately, the court emphasized that minimal delays do not automatically negate a claim if the legal team remains active in pursuing the defendants.","meta_description":"This episode details a Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals decision regarding whether a lawsuit was filed and served within the required statute of limitations…","key_points":[],"chapters":[],"topics":[],"duration_seconds":2504,"processing_state":"not_requested","actions":[{"name":"request_transcript","method":"POST","url":"https://stenobird.com/v1/public/podcasts/swear-on-the-stand-7111404/episodes/larkins-v-s-d-p-manufacturing-due-diligence-in-process-service/transcription-requests","description":"Idempotently request low-priority transcript generation for this episode."},{"name":"read_markdown","method":"GET","url":"https://stenobird.com/podcast/swear-on-the-stand-7111404/larkins-v-s-d-p-manufacturing-due-diligence-in-process-service.md","description":"Read the agent-friendly Markdown representation of this episode resource."}]}}