Yeah, the judge explained exactly how to serve TS. He had to have a process server stake out her house at Nashville and serve her personally since no one else was authorized to accept service. Of course, since Russ is Russ, he ignored that and tried to serve a lawyer that had represented her in the past and then her fan club (that cracked me up). To make it even more hilarious, he tried to serve the same law firm AGAIN, and was again told they weren't authorized to accept service for this suit. Then he said in his filings he waited in case they changed their mind. He really, really, has no clue about legal matters.
He has absolutely zero ability to understand the system because he has absolutely zero ability to look at any given situation in the abstract as if it were happening between other people. For example, Russ seems to think that a person's publicly declared "fan club" should be able to receive legal service on their behalf, but if you asked him, "Kiwi Farmers are basically your fan club at this point, so if someone wanted to sue
you, would it be acceptable to serve you through Kiwi Farms?" you can be sure that the answer would be "No". Actually, he'd probably blow a fuse at the question, because he can't understand anybody wanting to sue him because he's such a great guy, goshdarnit, and obviously anyone who would try is bias[sic] against the disabled so they shouldn't be allowed to try. But any good arguments as to "Why not?" that he could muster, such as "I don't actually keep them up to date with my contact info and on the contrary, actually I try to hide that info from them so stalkers won't have it", or "Anybody can
say that they're my fan, but it doesn't mean that they can or will act in my best interests", he would certainly not apply to his own case. Because he's Russell Greer, and your rules don't apply to him because he's disabled and an awesome 9/10 stud to boot. (It would still be funny if Null declared himself head of the Russell Greer fan club and stated that as such, he was qualified to receive legal service against Russell Greer though.)
And again, if you asked him "What if
you were somebody's lawyer once for one specific matter on one occasion years ago, do you think that it's fair for third parties to unilaterally impose the burden on you of receiving their lawsuits towards your former client indefinitely, without you receiving any additional payment?", he would certainly fail to draw any sort of connection between this hypothetical question and his own behavior. And if you tried to point it out to him, he wouldn't listen to you and would narcissisticly block you out, by staring at the floor and rewriting in his head what just happened even as it was happening to him.