A new filing in Garland County Circuit Court alleges that Jonathan L. Riches deliberately avoided multiple attempts to serve him with legal documents connected to an ongoing contempt dispute with Jaime T. Phillips.
Phillips filed the “Petitioner’s Motion Regarding Respondent’s Intentional Evasion of Service, Request for Alternative Service or Other Appropriate Relief, and Request for Expedited Consideration” on July 15, 2026, in the domestic relations case between Phillips and Riches.
According to the filing, Phillips previously filed a Motion for Contempt on June 24, along with supporting exhibits and a proposed modified no contact order. She then retained a certified Florida special process server to personally serve Riches with the summons and contempt motion.
The attached affidavit of non service states that the process server made two attempts at the Florida residence on June 27, at approximately 4:50 p.m. and 5:35 p.m. The server reported receiving no response at the door despite observing a vehicle identified as belonging to Riches in the driveway. A third attempt was made July 2, but the server reported being unable to reach the front door because of a posted “Private Property No Trespassing” sign and a makeshift barrier consisting of a gate, furniture and yellow cord stretched across the entrance.
The process server said a written notice was left at the gate and that additional efforts were made to contact Riches by telephone and text message regarding the documents awaiting service. According to the affidavit, no response was received and the process was returned as a non service.
Phillips argues in the motion that Riches nevertheless had actual knowledge of the proceedings. She alleges that during the two June 27 service attempts, Riches was conducting an approximately eight hour public YouTube livestream from inside the jointly owned residence. Screenshots from the livestream were submitted as Exhibit B in support of that allegation.
The filing also accuses Riches of continuing conduct that Phillips says was already raised in her pending Motion for Contempt. Among those allegations is the continued public use of thumbnail designs Phillips claims she created during their relationship. The motion alleges Riches continued displaying the works during livestreams for commercial gain even after the contempt motion was filed, with screenshots included as Exhibit C.
Phillips additionally objects to changes made to property the parties allegedly jointly own, including the installation of the no trespassing barrier. She claims the alteration was made without her knowledge or consent and expressed concerns that it could affect the property’s appearance, marketability or perceived value.
The motion further alleges that more than six months have passed without meaningful settlement discussions concerning jointly owned property, restitution or other financial matters. Phillips says she submitted a proposed Separation and Restitution Agreement through Riches’ attorney but received no acknowledgment, response or counterproposal.
Phillips is now asking the court to consider the affidavit and exhibits as evidence of what she characterizes as intentional evasion of service, take notice of her assertion that Riches is aware of the proceedings, grant her pending Motion for Contempt and impose any sanctions the court considers appropriate.
She is also asking the judge to adopt a proposed modified no contact order that would replace the existing mutual provisions with restrictions applicable solely to Riches.
The allegations contained in the motion represent Phillips’ claims to the court. The filing itself does not establish that the court has ruled that Riches intentionally evaded service or committed contempt.
About the Author
