Filing a civil suit against a military member may seem straightforward, but the moment active duty comes into play, everything changes. The Servicemembers Civil Relief Act (SCRA) is designed to ensure that those serving the country are not placed at a legal disadvantage while carrying out their duties.
For landlords, lenders, or attorneys, this means every step in the civil litigation process carries added weight. Even a small oversight can turn into a costly mistake, with courts ready to overturn judgments or impose penalties when compliance is lacking.
Knowing how to begin is critical, though many plaintiffs underestimate what is at stake. The process is not about avoiding a lawsuit. It is about filing it the right way.
Follow along as we break down the essential steps to file a civil suit while respecting servicemember protections and staying fully compliant.
Step-by-Step Process of Filing a Civil Suit Against a Military Member Under SCRA
Step 1: Get Military Status Confirmation
Courts do not move a lawsuit forward until they know if the defendant is serving on active duty. Cases have been thrown out when that proof was missing, which shows how important the first step really is.
Plaintiffs must provide records that clearly show service history, and the most reliable way to do this is to get military status from an approved verification source. Doing so helps demonstrate that the filing respects the protections granted to servicemembers under SCRA.
This is not a box to check but a safeguard for both sides. In a debt collection lawsuit, for example, filing without verified records could cause the ruling to be overturned and new penalties to be added. Keeping the verification report with case files proves compliance and prevents challenges that can disrupt the civil suit later on.
Step 2: Prepare and File the Required Affidavit
A lawsuit cannot move ahead on verification alone. Courts require a sworn statement called a nonmilitary affidavit, which confirms whether the defendant is currently in active duty. The document must be filled out with accurate details, signed by the plaintiff or representative, and notarized before it can be used in proceedings.
Judges use this affidavit to determine if SCRA protections apply. Missing or unreliable paperwork can delay the case, and in some situations, the filing is dismissed entirely. Affidavits based on outdated or incomplete records often face the same outcome.
When the affidavit is prepared correctly, with verification results to back it up, plaintiffs meet their legal obligations and protect the lawsuit from avoidable setbacks.
Step 3: Understand Restrictions on Default Judgments
Filing an affidavit does not guarantee the court will immediately move forward. Under SCRA, judges cannot enter a default judgment against a servicemember without taking extra measures to protect their rights.
If the defendant cannot appear, the court may appoint an attorney to represent them. In other situations, the judge can pause the case for at least 90 days when military service prevents the individual from participating fully.
These safeguards can affect the pace of the lawsuit, and plaintiffs should be prepared for delays. Courts have reversed rulings in the past when these protections were overlooked, which shows how critical compliance is. Approaching the case with this awareness helps plaintiffs avoid wasted time and strengthens the chances of their filing holding up under review.
Step 4: Seek Court Approval Before Proceeding
Courts hold the final say before certain actions against servicemembers can move forward. Lawsuits tied to evictions, foreclosures, or debt collection are reviewed with extra caution, and judges often pause these cases to account for active duty responsibilities.
Approval is never granted lightly. Plaintiffs must present affidavits, verification results, and show clear compliance with SCRA requirements before the court considers authorizing the action. A recent example shows the risks of ignoring key steps. In February 2025, the Department of Justice required BayPort Credit Union to pay nearly $110,000 after allegations that it repossessed vehicles and charged excessive interest without court orders.
This demonstrates that skipping judicial approval is more than a procedural error. It can result in overturned rulings, heavy penalties, and long-term reputational damage.
Maintain Ongoing Compliance Throughout the Case
Verifying duty status at the start of a lawsuit is only part of the responsibility. Courts expect ongoing diligence because military service can change unexpectedly. A defendant who was not on active duty when the case was filed may be called up months later, and judges have vacated rulings when plaintiffs failed to account for that change.
For longer cases, periodic verification is the safest way to stay compliant. Attorneys and creditors should build re-checks into their process, especially before major hearings or filings. Each update should be recorded, showing that every step was handled with care. These records can make the difference if the lawsuit is later questioned or appealed.
Neglecting this step has led to lawsuits collapsing after months of work, which highlights why continued verification is essential. Treating it as a routine safeguard ensures the case remains valid even if the defendant’s status shifts midstream.
Recognize the Risks of Non-Compliance
Mistakes with SCRA compliance rarely stay hidden. A judgment that seems final can be set aside if the court learns that the defendant’s duty status was not verified correctly. In other cases, judges have imposed restitution or fines when servicemembers were disadvantaged by incomplete filings.
The Department of Justice has gone further by pursuing enforcement actions against lenders and landlords, leading to large settlements that received wide attention. Alongside these penalties comes reputational harm, which can damage professional standing long after the case is resolved.
Avoiding these outcomes requires more than an initial check. Every lawsuit should include reliable verification and thorough documentation, giving the court clear evidence that the process was handled correctly from start to finish.
Conclusion
Bringing a civil suit against a servicemember demands precision at every stage. Courts look for accurate verification, properly filed affidavits, and clear proof that protections under SCRA were respected. Skipping any of these steps can turn a case upside down, with penalties, reversals, or federal enforcement close behind.
For attorneys, landlords, and lenders, treating compliance as a constant priority is the only way to move forward with confidence. Careful preparation keeps lawsuits intact, strengthens credibility in the courtroom, and upholds the protections that servicemembers are legally entitled to while serving the country.